The Internet Dating Safety Act became law in the state of New Jersey, the home of Lovefraud, on January 13, 2008. It is supposed to take effect next month.
The law applies only to New Jersey, USA, residents. It mandates that any Internet dating site must disclose to New Jersey members, clearly and conspicuously, whether it conducts criminal background checks. “The disclosure shall be provided when an electronic mail message is sent or received by a New Jersey member, on the profile describing a member to a New Jersey member, and on the website pages of the Internet dating service used when a New Jersey member signs up,” the law states. “A disclosure shall be in bold, capital letters in at least 12-point type.”
“Internet dating companies bear a responsibility to their customers to provide basic screening to weed out threatening individuals,” said Richard J. Codey, president of the New Jersey Senate, one of the law’s sponsors. “At the very least, Internet daters should at least know whether or not their chosen Web service provides such screening. This will open a lot of people’s eyes to the dangerous aspects of Internet dating.”
Cody’s last sentence represents only possible good that will come from this law—people in New Jersey may become aware of the dangers of Internet dating. In reality, the law is bogus. Online dating companies will never be able to screen out threatening individuals, even if they tried.
True.com lobbied for law
New Jersey, I’m embarrassed to say, was the first state to fall for a lobbying initiative by the dating website True.com.
I wrote about True.com a year ago, in Lying, cheating and online dating. True.com claims that it does not allow married people to sign up, and that it conducts a criminal background check of all members. Users should not believe that True.com is safe.
How does True.com screen for married people? It asks them to certify that they are not married.
And how does True.com run a background check? According to the Internet Alliance, True.com provides the names people give when they sign up—without attempting to verify any identities—to Rapsheets.com, which then runs the names through its database of criminal records. Rapsheets.com gets its information from various state governments that choose to participate—and many of them don’t. Plus, state records are notoriously incomplete—many counties do not even report crimes to a publicly accessible central database.
The bottom line is that True.com claims to screen for married people and criminals, but it reality, its screening is almost useless.
The law is, however, a marketing coup. True.com has succeeded in legislating its business model.
Other big players in online dating—such as Match.com and Yahoo Personals—opposed the law. Match.com concluded that background checks were worthless. But many users won’t know that.
“If consumers see a state mandated warning on the page of one company that doesn’t do screenings, over and over again, they’re going to think something is wrong,” says Braden Cox of NetChoice, who testified against the bill during hearings. “They’ll search out a site that does these screenings, and they’ll not read about the failures of criminal screenings because these will be buried in the terms of service. The result—a mistaken sense of safety.”
For more information on True.com’s shenanigans, see Hot but virtuous is an unlikely match for online dating service, in the New York Times.
Falling in love with a fantasy
Online dating is a huge business. According to Juniper Research, an Internet consultancy, online dating represents a $700 million market. Every month, 20 million people visit online dating sites.
Here’s what these 20 million people should know: All Internet dating sites are dangerous.
As Lovefraud explains in Online Seduction, anyone who falls in love with someone over the Internet falls in love with a fantasy. You never really know who you’re talking to. And much of the interpersonal information you usually use in order to evaluate someone—tone of voice, body language—is missing.
Furthermore, background checks on dating sites will never work because:
- It is impossible to find out if someone is married.
- Criminal records databases are incomplete.
- Crimes like fraud are rarely prosecuted, so there is no conviction and no record.
- Domestic violence often goes unreported.
- Many people who do not have criminal records are still predators.
Lovefraud readers have told many, many stories of becoming involved with sociopaths who seemed to be upstanding members of their communities, but were, in fact, emotionally, financially and even physically abusive. Much of this behavior never gets exposed in court, either criminal or civil. Therefore, there is no record.
Report dating ads on Lovefraud
Lovefraud endorses no dating sites. In fact, we make every effort to block dating sites from advertising on Lovefraud. Every time we see one, we add it to our banned list.
Still, you may see dating ads on Lovefraud.com. This is because Google enables advertisers to target ads geographically. So a dating site for Australians, for example, may advertise on our website, and here in New Jersey, we’ll never see it.
If you see an ad for a dating site on Lovefraud, please let us know. Send the url (www.datingsite.com) to terry@lovefraud.com, and we’ll block it.
Listen to your instincts
Dating sites represent a perfect storm for cheaters, criminals and con artists. Predators see plenty of targets who have already admitted to being lonely. Predators can hide their true identities and intentions. Predators can work many targets at once, looking for one—or more—who will give them what they want.
Yes, there are normal people on dating sites who just want to meet someone nice. So if you’re going to use a dating site, here’s my advice: Only get involved with people who live near you. This way, you can spend quality time with them—and check them out.
Finally, with online dating, keep your eyes and ears open, be skeptical—not starry-eyed, and always listen to your instincts.
I think a better idea than online dating – is to use the MeetUp system or site. I think that’s what it is called, where people get together because of like interests: politics, religion, hobbie etc.
I am sure psychos troll those groups too, but since you do meet in-person, in a group I think it’s safer and an easier way to shop around, and maybe make some real friends.
You can’t legislate morality or good sense—people will do what they want to for whatever reason.
We have “laws” against illegal drugs, they don’t work. We have laws against murder, they don’t work either. We have laws against incest, child abuse, spousal abuse, fraud, etc. and NONE of them stop anyone from doing anything that they WANT to do—every criminal thinks that they will somehow get away with what it is that they choose to do. They never expect to get caught. They will be the exception. No one robs a bank thinking they will get caught.
Laws are like locks, they only stop “honest” people—who don’t need stopping in the first place.
The P that I dated after my husband died, was a man I had casually known for about 10 years. I was lonely, crushed, grieving, and totally vulnerable to his attentions. He had just been kicked out of his 32 year abusive marriage to a woman who had finally had enough, and he was trolling for NS and another “respectable wife” to keep his harem of women at bay. He had me sited as his next “respectable” wife. The person who would supply a home and respectability in a community, from which he could venture out to keep the stable of “girlfriends” and the wife who would prevent them from expecting marriage or committment of any kind.
He had operated this way the entire 32 years of his “marriage” to his respectable wife, until he had finally gotten caught “with his hand in the cookie jar” and she tossed him out. Glad to be rid of him. Her comment to me later (I also knew this woman) was that “since he has been gone, I have not had to say “I”m sorry” 100 times a day.”
This man has no official “rap sheet” with the police, but he has instead a long list of ruined marriages, broken hearts, and broken promises in order to feed his sexual appetites and his “feeling of being the big stud”—and at the same time being recognised in the community as “someone.”
He has a huge desire to be “respected as a man of consequence” in his community, and at the same time, he leads the kind of life secretly that is predatory and uncaring, but his “image” as a “man of consequence” is extremely important to him.
The common interest group that we share (which is where I had met him 10 yrs before) was very important to him, and because of how he treated me, and other women within that group, though it is widely spread over several states, is actually a very “small” community of people, and his “cover” has been broken within that group. In addition, his “cover” has been broken in his own small community where he lives as well, because of his now-known behavior.
That’s not much satisfaction to a previous girl friend of his (that he was still trying to lure back at the same time he was trying to marry me) because he managed to burn her house to the ground in revenge. There was no way this was proveable, but there is NO doubt in her mind, or the minds of many of our mutual friends that he did this, he threatened her, had motive, opportunity, knowledge of how to do it (he is an electrician) and was near her home the day it happened. Not enough proof for the law, but NO doubt in the minds of anyone who knew him.
I don’t doubt one iota that if he wasn’t afraid that my own sons would seek revenge against him that my home wouldn’t have burned as well. At the time I broke up with him, I told him that if my house was struck by lightening and burned and I witnessed the lightening strike, I would still send my sons “after him”–that was a lie, of course, but I made him believe it, and ultimately he is a coward. He did get some minor “revenge” against me, but it was not burning my house. He called me in the middle of night of the 1 yr anniversary of the last time I saw him to gloat about it. I was asleep and answered the phone before I realized from caller ID it was him, when I woke up enough that I recognized his voice, I hung up.
For what it is worth, I think the N-injury I gave him and the “outing” of his REAL character rather than the “pillar of the community” image that he likes to project, at least punished him somewhat, but there will always be women suceptible to his charm and his throwing money and gifts at him. Buying expensive gifts for his women friends is one way he projects himself as the “big man”—when we were first dating and he offered to buy me this or that and I declined his offers, it actually seemed to insult him…now I know why.
Legislation won’t stop this kind of predator or the millions of others—on line or off. Only educating the potential victims so that they do not fall prey to ANY predator is the answer. The jails are so full now from serious violent crime that there is a waiting list to get from the local jail to the prisons as it is. Unless they have actually killed someone my state is letting them out on parole —for each YEAR of the sentence they are serving 45 DAYS behind bars.
I have a little story about online dating.
Don’t do it.
The End.
Aloha, HOW RIGHT YOU ARE!
This is Nuts!!! We need to teach out kids how to avoid scams online. That is why there is legislation already!!!! Schools are mandated to teach internet safety like i-SAFE http://www.isafe.org. BTW – i-SAFE is great and my kids love it. But the truth is, this legislation does exactly what laws are NOT intended to do.
Aloha
Short and to the point – I love it!
The last guy I dated was from the online world. He wasn’t an N, P, S or Free’s ex-bf (I don’t think) but he wasn’t exactly normal, either. Saw some minor red flags of the indeterminate variety.
So, no more online for me.
I have so many interests and ways to meet people it’s not funny. But I always looked at those things as separate. Now I’m not, and it’s already making a world of difference. Between politics and movie volunteering, I’m meeting a whole new group of people who already have the same interests and overall education level . That italicized part is crucial. No matter who I’ve dated, they’ve never really shared any interests or educational background. It’s hard to make a connection without being on the same wavelength.
And the Internet is a P’s playground; have to agree after meeting a few of them that way.
I know people who have found someone through the Internet but for me, my ego can not take another “meeting” where the guy looks you up and down. I hate this.
Also, many guys go on and on about what a gentleman they are but then you find out that this only applies if they are getting what they want.. or if they think you are hot. If they don’t, any kind of grace goes out the window. I also find reading their profiles is very disturbing to me. Do men actually think they should put their sexual preferences and requirements in an ad? Or discuss them on the first date? One would NEVER bring up these subjects meeting a stranger at a party unless they were a horses behind!
I am done with taking abuse from these Internet Goobers or worse yet, psychos!! HAHA!
Down with Internet dating!!!
Now I guess I need to get out more. :o)
I have a Google News Alert set for “Cuddle Party”, and this came up as a match: “And don’t go to a CUDDLE PARTY !!!!! They are probably all predators too … ”
Seems a bit harsh and judgmental for someone who has never been to a Cuddle Party. Hi, I’m Doug, and I hosted around 14 Cuddle Parties in Southern California, stopping about 18 months ago because of time conflicts. A couple of comments, if I might …
I can’t say there are no predators at Cuddle Parties, and beyond a personal conversation with everyone who said they wanted to come, there was no background checks. That said, it IS a very safe environment that is being closely monitored by 2 people, with a set of rules that makes it very difficult to exhibit bad behavior. The objective is an environment where it feels safe and IS safe, and where it is easy and encouraged to say “No, thank you.”
Compare that with almost any other environment (club, bar) where one might go to meet new friends, and it becomes clear that a Cuddle Party is probably the safest place to go to avoid predatory behavior. It’s also stressed that it’s ok to leave at any time, although I can’t think of anyone who ever did that because they were uncomfortable.
There is a lot more information on my web site, http://www.oc-cuddle.com for anyone who wants to learn more. The Cuddle Party founders’ site is also very good: http://www.cuddleparty.com.
I’m guessing your ex- wanted to go because he really wanted to go to a swing party, and figured this would have been close. He would have been very disappointed, and I am certain you would have a very different opinion if you had gone with him.
Thanks for the warning. I guess “CP” are just dumbdownded attempts to be FWB (friends with benefits) as if being a friend wasn’t enough.
I want to vomit. This is so ugly, in so many ways.
Hi fellow Bloggers,
I just want to remind you that there are a lot of people that stumble upon the site, quite by accident. And do not understand from where our opinion’s are derived.
We all talk about not living our life on the defensive…but with caution.
I saw a cuddle party on “Scott Baio is 45 and single” . They are a psychological tool that some people use to build/understand intimacy and trust. It may not be for us at this stage in our lives, but I have to say:
Everyone on the internet is not a N/S/P.
Everyone in a bar is not….
Everyone walking their dog is not….
Everyone at the gym is not….
Everyone at work is not….
Bitterness is not the intent of this site…I know it is not. Learning from our experiences and sharing and healing from mutual understanding is. DougL is another person who was quick to form an opinion without knowing what the site was about….Please remember that when you begin to blog in defense that, even I, as a reader/blogger, can hear the contempt in the words…and, these people who blog on accident are innocent…they are surprised and shocked..because they DON’T KNOW. We all know better…We should do better.