What’s the formula for the perfect marriage?

By Dani Garavelli

IF YOU thought the secret to choosing a lover who will last a lifetime was down to chemistry, then think again. According to new research, the best way to tell if a marriage will go the distance or fall at the first hurdle is by trusting another science altogether � mathematics.
Keen to rid society of the blight of divorce, mathematicians assessed the staying power of 1,074 Swiss couples and came up with a formula for a long-lasting union. Ditching such airy-fairy notions as love, romance and sexual compatibility, they used the “linear assignment model” � a methodology used by businesses to match workers to appropriate tasks � to “optimise spousal allocation”. Yes, that means helping people end up with the best possible partner.

The results were dramatic. Having assessed the age difference, cultural and educational background and divorce history of all the couples, the academics found the marriages most likely to succeed were those in which the woman was five or more years younger than her partner, and also better educated.

Couples in which the woman was more than five years older than the man were three times as likely to split up as those where both partners were the same age. And those in which the woman was more than five years older, neither partner was well-educated and one had a previous divorce, stood the least chance of surviving.



“Being able to choose our partners in the way we do is a bit of a luxury,” says Emmanuel Fragni�re, a lecturer in management science at Bath University and co-author of the report. “As recently as a few decades ago, marriages were a matter for the community. We know divorce has an economic, social and psychological cost, so why not try to improve the odds of a marriage succeeding?”

But is a mathematical approach to dating really more likely to improve the odds of a successful marriage than a sociological or psychological one? And can immutable facts such as age difference or educational background really do more to keep a relationship afloat than empathy, tolerance, compromise and a healthy sex life?

Fragni�re makes no apology for looking beyond the factors usually credited with keeping love alive. “It appears that men and women ‘choose’ their mates on the basis of feelings of love, physical attraction, similarity of tastes, beliefs, attitudes, and shared values,” he says. “All of these determinants are supposed to help them be happy together. However, research has shown that the longevity of marriages or partnerships also depends on objective attributes such as differences in age, family history, and educational levels.

“We imagined what it would be like if you had a regime like in North Korea, say, and marriages could be coordinated by a central agency. After looking at the impact of age difference, and cultural and educational background, we reallocated around 68 per cent of individuals to a new couple that we posited had a higher likelihood of survival.”

It all sounds a bit Brave New World. But could it perhaps throw light on some of the great love affairs of history? If only Cathy had been just a couple of years younger, might she and Heathcliff have escaped from the gloomy Yorkshire moors and settled down to a life of domestic bliss in a town house in Kensington? If only Anne Boleyn had stuck in at school, could she have kept her head?

The notion that husbands should be older than their wives goes back centuries and spans several continents, although most cultures believe there should be a limit to the age gap. (In the West, one theory has it that the women should be no less than half her partner’s age plus seven).

The tradition probably stemmed from the expectation that a man would be able to provide for his wife and future family. “It is received wisdom that men choose younger women for evolutionary reasons, because they look like better breeders,” says Barbara Bloomfield, a counsellor with Relate and an author of books on love and dating. “But then, of course, they may trade off looks for kindness and intelligence.” Equally, received wisdom says men look for women of lower social or educational status so as not to feel threatened.

A study carried out by Aberdeen, Glasgow, Edinburgh and Bristol universities in 2005 found that the likelihood of marriage increased by 35 per cent for men for each 16 point increase in IQ, whereas for women, there was a 40 per cent drop for each 16 point rise, suggesting either that men aren’t interested in clever women, or that clever women have no interest in getting married.

So why do relationships where the woman is better-educated stand the best chance of survival? “As a counsellor for 14 years, I have found that women do tend to set the emotional bar,” says Bloomfield. “They are far more likely to divorce men than the other way around, so you could hypothesis that maybe better educated women make better choices.”



Fragni�re � who, it has to be said, has his tongue firmly in his cheek � accepts his research is unlikely to revolutionise dating, but wonders if it could have an application in the world of internet dating. Sites such as Match.com promise you will find someone special within six months or they will give you your money back.

At Edinburgh-based Datetheuk, for example, members have myriad options for checking out their compatibility with a potential partner. They can draw up their own profiles, look at other members’ profiles, rely on recommendations from the agency or suss out other people’s personalities by reading messages posted on public forums.

Checking the age or educational backgrounds of potential matches is no doubt part of the process � but it probably comes second to that first glance at the potential suitor’s photo.

A more obvious problem with the report is that it fails to take couples’ happiness into account. Not all long-term married couples are happy with their lot, after all. “It was not one of the criteria we included, but it might be possible to develop the model further and include some psychological criteria, and then, I suppose, happiness could be included,” says Fragni�re.

The Blind Date Meets the All-Seeing Internet

By Ellen McCarthy
Washington Post Staff Writer

Has it happened, finally? Has the Internet killed the blind date?

Given a first and last name, Google will often reveal where a person lives, how much they paid for their place, what they wrote in their last letter to the editor, possibly what kind of unsightly sandals they were photographed wearing at each stop on their last cross-country adventure.

And if their Facebook profile isn’t private, as Jeanna Brown, a 25-year-old single woman from Mitchellville, knows, “you can find out a whole lot.”

Web searches for background intel on prospective dates have been undertaken since the dawn of cyberspace, but only in the last few years—with the advent of Twitter, Flickr, LinkedIn and the like—have our online identities grown so rich that they routinely precede in-person introductions.

“First impressions have changed,” says Dan Schawbel, a 26-year-old personal branding consultant. “For me a first impression could be a Google search, a search on Facebook or MySpace. . . . You can do research beforehand and know whether or not you want to go through with the date.”

On more than one occasion, Brown has found out that men who represented themselves to be single were actually married, sometimes with children. The Web, she says, often reveals the discrepancy between “what they say they are and what they really are.”

Nancianne Sterling, a 32-year-old Arlington woman who runs TargetLove.com, a service that coaches clients through the Internet dating process, understands the temptation to scour the Web for information on a person in advance of a date with them. Before meeting her current boyfriend, she used to do it all the time, looking for r�sum�s, school associations, blogs and anything else she could dig up.

But she advises clients to skip the preemptive search.

Scattered bits of online info color the way people look at their prospective dates—and not usually in a good way, she says. “We make determinations about somebody, whereas if we met them and we liked them, it wouldn’t be as big a deal.”

In this region in particular she often hears from clients who found that a potential date donated to a candidate of a political party different from their own and then decided it was game over.

“People come up with all these reasons why somebody’s not going to be good, before they meet them,” she says. “It’s almost like you’re looking for quantitative information to make a decision without emotion—and when you do that, you don’t allow yourself to feel for that person in the way that you might’ve if you hadn’t looked up any of the information.”

Plus, she adds, it kills the fun and mystery inherent in allowing a person to reveal themselves organically over time.

That’s not going to stop the author of DC Dating Adventures, a blog written by a 29-year-old District woman who asked that her name not be used because she blogs anonymously.

She once Googled the e-mail address of a guy who’d asked her out and found it registered on foot fetish message boards. A quick search saved her from having to find that out in person, she says.

And even as she uses the power of the Internet to research others, she’s tried to reduce her own Web trail. She made her Facebook profile private, deleted her entire MySpace page and regularly Googles herself to make sure nothing strange comes up.

That, Schawbel insists, is something everyone should be doing. Like grooming before an actual date, he says, people should be aware of how they’re presenting themselves online. “In person it’s much easier to control the way you’re perceived—people can get to know your personality. The Web sort of lacks that,” he says. “You need to put effort to the way you put stuff online.”

Brown agrees. A Web presence might not be the full measure of a person, but what’s up on a social networking site, she thinks, is “what you want to be seen. And if that’s how you choose to represent yourself, then that’s truly who you are.”

And despite Sterling’s entreaties, people like Brown aren’t going to resist the urge to do a quick pre-date Google search. “Why not? If the information is available, you might as well take advantage of it,” she says.

I Do, I Do: Online profile to real-life love

To say that Charles Perniciaro, 52, had become cynical about dating is something of an understatement. “I think he was looking to settle down, but things weren’t coming together for him,” said John Millns, a close friend. “He was getting frustrated.”

In 2007, Charles decided to try online dating. But his cynicism only grew when several women he met on the Internet showed up for a “first date” looking nothing like their online photos. “Those pictures must have been taken decades ago,” said Charles, a dermatologist who was divorced for almost a decade.

In January 2008, Charles read the online profile of Gail Kahler, 47, and found himself intrigued. Gail wrote she “was looking for a guy who loved sports and could also discuss a good book.” Charles knew he fit the bill. The two corresponded for several weeks and eventually met for dinner at St. Johns Town Center where they giggled and chatted the night away.

Charles knew he wanted to see Gail again. Not only did she look exactly like her online photo, he knew they had really enjoyed each other. But Gail was just beginning to date after losing her husband to a long illness, and she told Charles she “planned to date 100 men before she dated anyone twice.” Still, Charles couldn’t let her go that easily. He called Gail the next night and invited her to a dermatology convention in San Antonio that weekend. “I told her there were no strings attached, she would have her own room, and she should come with an extra suitcase because she’d be able to fill it with free samples of creams and things,” he said.

Gail, a fourth-grade teacher at Fort Caroline Elementary, was inclined to say no. But she asked her grown daughter and a close friend what she should do. “And they both said ‘yes,’ “ Gail said. Then Gail checked to make sure Charles was really registered at the convention. He was. In fact, he was giving a seminar. She said yes. “Right from the beginning he swept me off my feet,” Gail said.

The two said “I do” May 30 in New Orleans, where Charles grew up. After the ceremony, the wedding party “second-lined” their way to the reception at Galatois Restaurant. A second line is a parade led by a police escort, then a jazz band (in this case it was a band from Chalmette High School, Charles’ alma mater) followed by the bride, groom and guests, all dancing, all holding parasols, all waving handkerchiefs.

Millns, who served as best man, summed it up this way: “I can’t think of a better ending for two nicer people,” he said.

How to be a Cyber Treater:

1.  Look like your photo. 

2.  Tell the truth, especially about things a potential mate would want to know (relationship histories, children and families, disease or disabilities, or financial difficulties, for instance).  If you have a secret that keeps you from dating, you need my article “Do you have a secret? How to tell your Sweetheart Your Worst”

3.  Be polite, kind, responsible, and prompt in your communications.  Kindness and courtesy cost nothing.

4.  If you are not interested in pursuing contact, say so in an email.  Be tactful.  This process is hard enough on everyone.  Rude and nasty need to take a hike.

5.  Do not continue contact or date if you know that this person is not for you, just because you don’t know how to say “no” or don’t want to hurt the other’s feelings.  It is cowardly, not kind.  Exit graciously and free your date up to find someone who truly would appreciate them.

6.  Take your share of the responsibility in keeping communications going and building a relationship.  Dare to initiate contact, offer plans for meeting, and be ready to share expenses.

7.  Show by your behavior that you treat the possible relationship as important.  Groom and dress for meetings—neat and clean go a long way, as does freshly barbered or hair-styled.  Show up when you said you would.  Offer to help pay.

8.  Try to relax and don’t push yourself in an attempt to impress.  If you are interested in your date and ask questions, that will help you feel less in the spotlight.

9.  Avoid alcohol and drugs, one drink at the most.  You need your senses totally sharp so that you can decide whether you want to see this person again.  And no one is more attractive drunk or high.

10. Expect and insist the same respect and honesty from your date as you are willing to provide for them.  If your date misbehaves or you find that you have been lied to or misled, you are not obligated to see this person again or even endure the rest of the date.

Despite the “Trick or treat?” of Halloween, most of us want the treat part and would just as soon skip the trick.  No one likes feeling tricked.  If you’d like the option of a second date, improve your chances dramatically: make yourself into a treat. 

P. S. If you are unsure if you are a “Trick or treat?” you could use my book “Find a Sweetheart Soon!” [ www.YourLoveTripPlanner.com ] It will take you through all the ways I could think of that singles undermine themselves in their search for love, and help you design your solutions.  There is nothing like being ready when the right person shows up.  “Find a Sweetheart Soon!” will get you readier than you can imagine.

Anyone who has done any online dating or listened to other singles knows that dating horror stories abound.  What you hear less of is the successes, and there are plenty, believe me.  I’m one of them—I met my husband online.  If people like me weren’t finding love online, Internet dating sites would have gone out of business years ago. 

But if there is ever a time for horror, it’s Halloween. If you need a few lessons on how to scare the willies out of your cyber sweetheart, try some of these Trickster Tips.  You won’t even need to yell “Boo!”

How to be a Cyber Trickster:

1.  Lie—about your age, weight, height, or marital status.

2.  Post an old or deceptive photo. (Most men have learned how far a “glamour shot” is from reality, but not all...)

3.  Start writing/talking about sex in the second email or first phone call.

4.  Neglect your personal hygiene.  Do not have your teeth cleaned in recent memory.  Or take a bath. Or clean your nails.  Or have your hair cut.  Or your gray roots dyed.

5.  Treat your first date like a trip to the Laundromat.  Dress accordingly.

6.  Expect the worse and make it happen.

7.  Take your time.  Be late.  Very late. 

8.  Forget your wallet.

9.  Show up drunk or high, or proceed to get that way.

10. Say that you will call or email and then don’t.

Scary, huh?  Well, if you’d like to more of a treat and less of a trick, avoid the boo-boos that so many others have made before you.

Tech Dating 101: Decoding Post-Date Texts and IMs
by GeekSugar

The men of Swingers championed a rule that fundamentally changed how fellas of the ‘90s plotted post-date communication. They said a man should wait three days after a date to call a woman so she would want them more. Preposterous, right? Today the possibilities for contact are so varied � email, work email, IM, gChat, Facebook, Twitter, text and so on � that it can be harder to gauge interest or commitment based on the time frame and way someone reaches out. In this installment of my Tech Dating 101 series I will address how technology and texting have changed the moments and days after a good first date. To see what I think (spoiler alert: it’s complicated), read more.

* The same day text: Most women I have talked to say they like it when a guy follows up a first date with a short text. It doesn’t have to be sexy, or even offer the promise of a second date, but texting is a simple, quick and sweet way to say thanks, without an immediate call. If you had a great time and want him to know, text him yourself. It is one of the most relaxed forms of communication (no login required!) and will keep both of you from getting too wordy.

* The three-day text: Consensus among friends is that the day three text could be a cop-out (as in, he isn’t ready to commit to a phone call and he’s using the antiquated Swingers mentality to make you want him more), but it does count as contact and an effort.

* The instant reach out: If a guy initiates communication via instant messaging in any form (iChat, Yahoo Messenger, gChat, Facebook chat etc.) less than two hours after a date he can come off as eager to get the party started. Do with that what you will. I do; however, think it is polite for him to acknowledge he sees you online if you pop online right after your date or in the days following. It’s ridiculous to pretend you don’t see one another online. That being said, instant messages are not a phone call. If he really wants to talk to you he should still call you up, or at the very least send an email to plan your next get-together.

Tech Dating 101: What’s Up With All the Emoticons?

I was out with a group of girlfriends last week when one of them received a text from a guy she’d gone on a few dates with. It read, “Great time last night ;)” � with the winking emoticon. Apparently after every single text he sends (and sometimes midtext, too), he includes an emoticon.

One of our friends thinks he’s just being friendly, but another is convinced he’s downright weird. And the friend-in question is not sure whether to accept his request to go on another date. “It’s too weird!” she says. “I’m not sure what he’s trying to do, but it’s sort of creeping me out.”

I’ve covered a few text-etiquette rules, like if it’s appropriate to get out of a date via text and how to decode post-date texts and IMs, but what about the little day-to-day exchanges you tend to have with a potential love interest? What do all of those smiley faces mean? For more of my emoticon advice,read more.

Generally, you seem to feel emoticons are fine for personal use but not for professional. What about dating? I can see where my friend is coming from, and I’ve definitely decided to check myself when it comes to text and instant-message emoticon use. Turns out I use them more often than I should! I received some solid emoticon advice recently: “Don’t ever use an emoticon smiley face with a guy you don’t want to make out with.”

I asked a few guy friends, and their answers varied from the seemingly obvious: “He types a smiley face because he’s actually smiling,” to the sort-of charming: “He really likes you and is trying to be endearing,” to the less virtuous, “He thinks you’re into him and is trying to charm you into another date.”

If his emoticon use really bothers you, you could always address it . . . but risk him feeling rejected. Until he starts adding the spoken equivalent of emoticons into regular conversation (think: “I’m sorry you can’t hang out later. Sad face."), it’s probably not worth getting worked up over. If you simply can’t take it anymore, you could always try calling him instead. Have you ever dated an overzealous emoticoner? Is it ever cute? Or just annoying?

Death do us part; then on to Match.com

Vicki Kennedy makes for a striking widow. Now that she’s said she won’t fill her husband’s senate seat, she has stepped firmly into the national conscience as a public figure of grief. The First Lady holds her hand at presidential conferences and liberals everywhere speak her name at prayer circles. At 55, she might some day remarry. But the odds are against it.

If things were different and Vicki passed before Teddy, chances are he’d be married this time next year. In fact, men are four times more likely to remarry after losing a spouse; 61 percent of men start dating within the first two years, compared to just 19 percent of women. It’s ironic that the same men who hem and haw about being dragged into marriage � there’s a reason women set ultimatums � are the ones who rush to find a ball and chain so soon after losing their spouse.

I’ve toured the circuit of grief groups; the women there often titter about the widowers who come to troll for dates. “They can’t do a load of laundry,” the women say, throwing their hands up in exasperation. “They don’t know how to cook for themselves.” With older widowers especially, men who served as breadwinners while their wives tended the home front, the transition to forced bachelorhood can be rocky. They’re suddenly left wondering who will fold their socks or dust the TV stand.

But, really, it’s more than the housework. My feeling is that there’s a companionship that develops in marriages, a profound understanding that’s hard to duplicate. We learn the most intimate details about someone over the course of a marriage: how they sleep with their mouth open or litter the sink with hairs after they shave. It’s these same details that grate on us over time, that drive couples to alcohol, recreational drugs and � worse � marriage counseling. But what we gain in this exchange, this soul-level knowledge of another human being, is a partner who knows us just as intimately.

Abel Keogh, who lost his wife when he was 26 years old, echoes this feeling.

“In my case, I really missed being married,” he says. “You can share your problems, your joys. You take pleasure in their life and they take pleasure in yours.” Mr. Keogh has gone on to write a book on grieving for men, “Room for Two,” and runs the online Facebook group, “Dating a Widower.” He tells men who have lost a spouse and are considering dating again to take a step back and evaluate the situation. “Make sure it’s for the right reasons,” he says, “and not just because you’re lonely.”

Which is good advice for all of us. So often we rush into relationships wanting to be known and we are quick to dismiss our partners when they fail to comprehend us fully. Instead of dashing headlong into a break-up at the first sign of discord, we would be wise to stick with some relationships for the long haul. To know someone fully � and to be known by them � takes time. For most of us, that means a lifetime.

Woman sues dating service after several dates and no Mr. Right

CHICAGO (STNG)—A woman who signed up for a Chicago-based dating service hoping to meet her soul mate filed a lawsuit against the matchmaking company Thursday, claiming all the service brought her was heartache, disappointment and stress�and cost her $3,500.

In May, Sheena Finnegan signed a contract with �lan Relationships, which has been �Chicago’s premiere personal introduction service� for 18 years, according to its Web site.

Finnegan, who refers to herself as a �busy, professional Chicago single� whose �time constraints prohibit [her] from getting the kind of exposure necessary to find a life partner� claims she counted on �lan to find her a suitable life partner, according to the suit filed in Cook County Circuit Court Thursday.

In exchange for $3,500, the service allegedly promised Finnegan to find her �genuine, high caliber, professional� matches by setting her up with six �qualified introductions� in a six-month period, the suit alleges.

As opposed to Internet dating, �lan�s Web site claims they �value the significance of personal introductions based on true compatibility and priorities.�

In May, Finnegan met with the company�s director, Mary Harris and owner Eileen Messier for over an hour, explaining what she was looking for in a mate. Harris and Messier are also named as defendants in the suit.

On May 30, Finnegan had her first date scheduled with a man named Mark�he canceled due to �car trouble,� the suit said. On June 6, she went on a date with a man named Steve, who she felt was not a good match. On June 28, she finally met Mark�who bragged about his homes and money, which Finnegan was not pleased with. On June 20 and June 27, she was scheduled to go on a date with Chris�who canceled both times.

On June 26, Finnegan contacted �lan, asking that her membership be extended due to the cancellations. The company agreed to extend it for one month, the suit said. After a few more dates, and two more cancellations, Finnegan said she realized the men she was meeting were not serious about finding a relationship�and that one of the men did not even sign up on his own accord, someone else signed him up.

She again contacted the company, claiming the service was not what she was promised and asking for a full refund. The company refused.

Finnegan said the company�s contract was �misleading�false�fraudulent� and did not make any favorable matches for her. The suit claims Finnegan endured heartache, stress and disappointment and has nothing to show for the $3,500 she spent trying to find a committed relationship.

The suit accuses �lan, Harris and Messier of breach of contract, intentional infliction of emotional distress, fraud, deceptive business practices, intentional misrepresentation of material fact and negligence. The eight-count suit asks for an unspecified amount of money in damages as well as an injunction to prevent �lan from continuing to practice deceitful business techniques.