It’s actually a site which works with other dating sites, like Match, eHarmony, PlentyofFish, OKCupid, and others.

It’s called Weopia, at it provides virtual dating to let online daters get to know each other better. When we first read about it, we were blown away by the idea.

Weopia works like this; when you’ve met someone that interests you, you invite them on a virtual date. They say it allows you to get to know someone better, in less time, and those that use virtual dating are usually more happy with their new mate, and twice as likely to have a second date.

Sounds like a great way to find someone you might be compatible with.

Here’s a video showing what it’s like inside Weopia…

The Average Erection Measures 8 Inches
FALSE: Relax, Shorty. It’s closer to 6.

Oysters Make You Horny
FALSE: You make you horny. “There is no scientific evidence that oysters increase libido,” says Dr. Pryor. “But there may be a placebo effect, so if it works, great!”

Cutting Out Broccoli Will Make Your Semen Taste Better
TRUE: Semen is naturally bitter, and eating broccoli and drinking coffee can make it worse. A ray of hope for the Oral Sex Diet!

Having Sex Before an Important Event—the Big Game, the Critical Presentation—Can Ruin Your Performance in the Event
FALSE: Swiss researchers performed stress tests on people 2 and 10 hours after the subjects had had sex, and found that by 10 hours, the participants were fully recovered. There was only a small dip in performance 2 hours after sex.

Don’t you feel better having read that?

Given that you have 160 characters per text message, you’re limited in your conversation. Sure, you could send multiple messages, but is this actually the way to meet people? I can see it be a way of maintaining communications, but think the chances of meeting a good match via text gives you worse odds than all the other choices out there, from online dating to phone chat lines and anything else you can think of.

Text dating or text flirting is probably fine, after you’ve actually found someone. Some might argue “what’s the difference between a private message on a dating site to a text message?” Good question.

If dating is about finding someone that’s right for you, aren’t you cheating yourself of finding that kind of compatiblility when using text messaging for dating?

Expert opinions on love and compatibility, and the interaction between biology and behavior. 

by Hara Estroff Marano and Carlin Flora

We talked to a variety of experts who could be expected to provide insight into these key qualities. From family researchers to matchmakers, each has watched countless couples draw together and pull apart. And each suggested the same thing: We’re looking at love all wrong.

Compatibility does not hinge on some personal inventory of traits. Compatibility isn’t something you have. It’s something you make. It’s a process, one that you negotiate as you go along. Again and again. It’s a disposition, an attitude, a willingness to work.

And while we’re redefining compatibility, let’s banish its more combustible cousin, “chemistry,” that black box of a term too often invoked to denote the magic ingredient of a good relationship. Chemistry is an alluring concept, but much too frequently people use it to absolve themselves of the need to consciously examine their approach to one another. As if the muse of love will alight on their shoulder and sprinkle fairy dust on them, and then they will suddenly open their eyes and behold The Perfect Mate—without prying open their own heart, embracing an unwavering willingness to see the other in a positive light or doing the hard work of exploring, knowing and respecting another human being.

Love operates on many levels. It involves a dauntingly complex interplay of biology and behavior. But it operates best when we add a certain spirit, when we consciously shape our relationships through an attitude of goodwill. Here, experts weigh in:

See a very interesting and scientific article on chemistry and attribute matching for date selection by Hara Estroff Marano and Carlin Flora in Psychology Today.

The Ann Summers-style wannabe stripper look doesn’t hit the spot any more, if, indeed, it ever really did. So why are the stores still groaning with so many frilly, fancy sets? If women find them uncomfortable and annoying, and men see them as cheesy (and in some cases, intimidating), who is keeping these offending items on the shelves?

It’s time to strike a blow against saucy, seaside-postcard pants and bras as we reveal what men really like and what they think is, well, pants….

Continued at http://www.dailymail.co.uk