Is the perfect match a click away?

by Matt Katz (Home News Tribune)

Humans have always looked for a formula for love. Some cultures believe all it takes is a bunch of cash, maybe a donkey or two, and a signed parental "arrangement."

Some women who've rejected me think love only works if the man is tall — or at least taller than 5-foot-8. Others, like Paula Abdul, simply believe "opposites attract."

Now, thanks to the Internet and our societal obsession over finding an answer to EVERYTHING, there's a new way to find love: Take a test.

A range of dating sites are offering personality tests to better match people, and some even hired scientists — who always get the girls — to come up with the questions.

There's Chemistry.com, which asks users to look at their hands to determine the size of their ring fingers (and therefore the amount of testosterone affecting their personality).

There's True.com's 99-question personality profile, which intersperses questions about parenting style and shopping habits with random sex questions.

EHarmony might be the most famous site that uses personality profiling, but I was too lazy to fill out the 400-plus questions — I mean, don't people have jobs??! — and I'm also offended by the fact that it weirdly doesn't accept gay people or those who have been married more than twice.

To test these tests, I instead signed up for PerfectMatch.com — a site made famous by an atrocious movie, "Must Love Dogs." Dr. Pepper Schwartz, a sociologist, developed her "Duet" test: "Whether you are looking for a real relationship or you're ready for marriage, PerfectMatch.com works."

Just hold up one second, Dr. Pepper. I think Matt and Deb will be the judge of that.

My girlfriend, Deb, and I each created profiles as if we were looking for a partner, and then one night we took out our respective laptops and filled out the Duet questionnaire. (I really know how to show my lady a good time.)

Theoretically, we would turn up as each other's matches. If not, then one of two things is destined for failure: These dating sites, or our relationship. Or both.

Some parts of the questionnaire left me with more questions: What's the difference between having "casual," "trendy" or "contemporary" fashion style? Why isn't "bar" listed as a favorite first-date place? Why are there only two choices for favorite hobbies, and what kind of girl gets matched with the guy who picks both antiquing and video games?

Of course, the questionnaire isn't a perfect analysis. But I like how these sites don't just ask "what do you like" questions; they probe your tolerance for the "little things." The little things in the beginning of courtship lead to the fighting, divorcing and joint custody years later, and that's why they're so important.

Because it is important if you put your dirty underwear in the hamper and your partner puts it on top of the TV. It is important if you think kids should be free to make their own decisions or if you think they should be attached to one of those kid-leashes at the mall.

Initially, our answers seemed to indicate compatibility. I came out as an RACV — risk taker, high energy, cautious, seeks variety. Deb was a RAOV — instead of "cautious," she's apparently "optimistic," even though she's not. Apparently, RACVs and RAOVs get along really well.

And for me, the site even said this: "People probably see you as awesome."

Awesome.

But then we conducted the real test to find out if PerfectMatch.com would actually link us up with each other. Instead of listing Deb as my "perfect match," the site e-mailed me 14 other women ages 18 to 37, most of whom lived in other states. Not only wasn't Deb good for me, but apparently I'd be better off driving two hours to find a better match.

Deb didn't get me as her "perfect match," either. Instead, she got a 25-year-old from Manhattan named Alexis. She read his profile curiously. "Ooooh," she cooed. "He knows French."

I'm not sure what all of this means. Hopefully, it just means these tests are bogus.