Dating in college

Beat the odds,

Meet the man behind eHarmony

Dr. Neil Clark Warren, Founder

Dr. Warren is a clinical psychologist and author of eight books on love, marriage and emotional health. During 35 years of counseling thousands of married couples, Dr. Warren observed a set of characteristics that seemed to be present in all successful relationships. He called them the 29 Dimensions of Compatibility. After extensive research involving thousands of married couples, Dr. Warren confirmed that these dimensions were indeed highly predictive of relationship success and could be used to match singles. Ten years later, eHarmony's compatibility matching is responsible for nearly 4% of U. S. marriages.*

*2012 U. S. survey conducted for eHarmony by Harris Interactive®

eHarmony - #1 Trusted Online Dating Site for Singles

eHarmony is the first service within the online dating industry to use a scientific approach to matching highly compatible singles. eHarmony's matching is based on using its 29 DIMENSIONS® model to match couples based on features of compatibility found in thousands of successful relationships.

eHarmony is committed to helping singles find love every day . and with over 20 million registered online users, we are confident in our ability to do so. The eHarmony Compatibility Matching System® matches single women and men based on 29 Dimensions® of Compatibility for lasting and fulfilling relationships.

Traditional Internet dating can be challenging for those singles looking for love that lasts. But eHarmony is not a traditional dating site. Of all the single men or women you may meet online, very few will be compatible with you specifically, and it can be difficult to determine the level of compatibility of a potential partner through methods of conventional dating services – browsing classified ads, online personals, or viewing profile photos. Our Compatibility Matching System does the work for you by narrowing the field from thousands of single prospects to match you with a select group of compatible matches with whom you can build a quality relationship.

4 Easy Steps to Find the Right Match.

Complete our Relationship Questionnaire and get your FREE Personality Profile.

Review your selected, highly-compatible matches FREE!

Pick the plan that best suits you when you're ready to communicate .

Get to know your matches at your own pace, and start dating !

Nearly 4% of U. S. Newlyweds Can't Be Wrong

eHarmony is different than other online dating websites and services, and we believe our success speaks for itself. On average, 438 people get married every day in the United States because of eHarmony; that accounts for nearly 4% of new U. S. marriages.* At eHarmony, we believe you deserve to find love – true love that comes with a lasting relationship. Because of this, we are committed to assisting singles everywhere in their search to find love and romantic fulfillment.

*2012 U. S. survey conducted for eHarmony by Harris Interactive® online, very few will be compatible with you specifically, and it can be difficult to determine the level of compatibility of a potential partner through methods of conventional dating services – browsing classified ads, online personals, or viewing profile photos. Our Compatibility Matching System does the work for you by narrowing the field from thousands of single prospects to match you with a select group of compatible matches with whom you can build a quality relationship.

Meet People of all Ages, Races, and Religions on eHarmony

With over 20 million registered users, the eHarmony member base is an ethnically, racially, and religiously diverse group of individuals of all ages – all of whom are looking to find someone special. Amongst our most popular demographics are: Christian Singles. Jewish Singles. Black Singles. Hispanic Singles. Asian Singles. 30s Singles and Senior Singles. We understand it can be difficult to find a mate with whom you share a similar background, goals, or beliefs, and regardless of who you may be looking for, eHarmony wants to help you find the love of your life.

Find Local Singles Online

Free Personality Profile

Receive your Free Personality Profile and get matched just by taking our Relationship Questionnaire.

More Personal than Personal Ads

Unlike traditional dating websites, eHarmony matches compatible men and women based on 29 Dimensions of Compatibility that are predictors of long-term relationship success. Determining compatibility through conventional dating methods could take months, or even years, of interaction between you and your potential partner. At eHarmony, we deliver more than personal ads . We are committed to matching you with truly compatible men or women in order to provide you with the best online dating and relationship experience possible. This is one of the many reasons why eHarmony is now the #1 Trusted Online Dating Site for American singles.

Free Online Dating Advice and Community

We at eHarmony want you to find love and romance and to make it last. To assist you in this quest, we offer free dating advice at: eH Advice. Meet people in our on line dating community, utilize our Date Planner, and receive advice from our relationship experts.

Start Dating with eHarmony Today

eHarmony Success Stories

If you've met someone special through eHarmony, please contact us and let us know how it all started and how the relationship is progressing. Thousands of eHarmony couples have shared their stories with us. To learn more about eHarmony success stories, simply click the link below.

Find True Compatibility Today

Join now and take the first step towards

Password:

Email address:

I have read the Terms of use and Privacy policy governing membership of the site and agree to their content. I grant consent to the use of cookies as defined in the Privacy policy and confirm that I am over 18 years of age.

Search Telegraph Dating

Success Stories - Telegraph Dating members share their experiences

Thank you. Great and easy to use.

Hector, 2014-02-09

Thank you so much for my first ever online dating experience. Stressful for a beginner at the start of my sub, but I have enjoyed it very much, and has changed my perception about online dating

Casual sexual relationship

A casual sexual relationship . casual relationship . or casual dating . is a physical and emotional relationship between two people who may have casual sex or a near-sexual relationship without necessarily demanding or expecting the extra commitments of a more formal romantic relationship. Motives for casual relationships vary. [ 1 ] There are significant gender and cultural differences in acceptance of and breadth of casual relationships, [ 2 ] [ 3 ] [ 4 ] [ 5 ] as well as in regrets about action/inaction in those relationships. [ 6 ]

A casual relationship may be part-time, or for a limited time. It may or may not entail partner-exclusivity. In each case, the relationship's dominance in the lives of those involved is being voluntarily limited, and there is usually a sense that the relationship is intended to endure only so long as both parties wish it to. Casual relationships sometimes include mutual support, affection and enjoyment, which underpin other forms of loving relationship. [ citation needed ]

People in a casual sexual relationship are sometimes referred to as "friends with benefits", but the terms may differ in that the latter term carries less of the implication of relations beyond sexual activity. A one-night stand is also different, as a casual sexual relationship extends beyond a single sexual encounter. Nonetheless, these concepts are similar to a casual sexual relationship in that the sex is generally focused on fulfilling sexual desires rather than romantic/emotional needs. [ citation needed ]

Penn State sanctions: $60M, bowl ban

Crippling Penalties For Penn State

Jesse Palmer discusses the sanctions handed down to Penn State and the difficult road ahead for coach Bill O'Brien.

The NCAA has hit Penn State with a $60 million sanction, a four-year football postseason ban and a vacation of all wins dating to 1998, the organization said Monday morning. The career record of Joe Paterno will reflect these vacated records, the NCAA said.

Penn State also must reduce 10 initial and 20 total scholarships each year for a four-year period.

More on NCAA sanctions

Penn State created a new class of misconduct during its handling of the Jerry Sandusky scandal. The NCAA responded to its deceit, inaction and arrogance with a new class of punishment, writes Gene Wojciechowski. Story

On one of the darkest days in Penn State history, the devastating sanctions levied against the Nittany Lions were met with mostly silence, writes Mark Schlabach. Story

Mark Emmert and the NCAA chancellors and presidents dealt with an unprecedented situation with unprecedented speed. Let's hope that their impatience doesn't get in the way of their intentions, writes Ivan Maisel. Story

The financial penalties are huge. But the scholarship reductions Penn State is facing could cripple its football program for years to come, writes Adam Rittenberg. Story

The NCAA revealed the sanctions as NCAA president Mark Emmert and Ed Ray, the chairman of the NCAA Executive Committee and Oregon State's president, spoke at a news conference in Indianapolis at the organization's headquarters.

"In the Penn State case, the results were perverse and unconscionable. No price the NCAA can levy will repair the grievous damage inflicted by Jerry Sandusky on his victims," Emmert said, referring to the former Penn State defensive coordinator convicted of 45 counts of child sex abuse last month.

The NCAA said the $60 million was equivalent to the average annual revenue of the football program. The NCAA ordered Penn State to pay the penalty funds into an endowment for "external programs preventing child sexual abuse or assisting victims and may not be used to fund such programs at the university."

"We had our backs to the wall on this," Penn State president Rodney Erickson told the Centre Daily Times of Pennsylvania in an interview later Monday, saying the school accepted the penalties to avoid the so-called "death penalty" that could have resulted in the suspension of the football program for at least one year. "We did what we thought was necessary to save the program."

In response to Erickson's comments, Ray, speaking to ESPN. com's Adam Rittenberg, said the NCAA did not threaten Penn State with the death penalty, and that the sanctions issued were unanimously agreed upon by the NCAA Executive Committee.

"It was a unanimous act," Ray said earlier during the news conference. "We needed to act."

In interview with ESPN's John Barr, Erickson reiterated his fear of the death penalty, not handed down since SMU was forced to drop football in 1987 because of extra benefits violations. The school decided not to play the next season, either, as it tried to regroup.

"The alternative was really far worse," Erickson said in the interview with ESPN. "The [death sentence] was a possibility. Various numbers were tossed around, four being the highest. The [death sentence] is traumatic for everyone. It's traumatic for the student-athletes involved. It's traumatic for the university. It's traumatic for the university, particularly smaller ones, kind of like we are here in central Pennsylvania."

"That's simply the answer," Erickson said. "I thought it was better to go down this path than face a multiple-year death penalty."

With the wins from 1998-2011 vacated, Paterno moves from 409 wins to 298, dropping him from first to 12th on the winningest NCAA football coach list. Penn State also will have six bowl wins and two conference championships erased.

The Penn State athletic program also will be put on a five-year probation and must work with an athletic-integrity monitor of NCAA's choosing. Any current or incoming football players are free to immediately transfer and compete at another school.

"There is incredible interest in what will happen to Penn State football," Ray said at the news conference. "But the fundamental chapter of this horrific story should focus on the innocent children and the powerful people who let them down."

The Big Ten fully supports the NCAA's actions, saying in a news release it is condemning and censuring the school for "egregiously" failing on "many levels -- morally, ethically and potentially criminally."

NCAA Sanctions Against Penn State

• $60 million fine

• Vacating of wins from 1998-2011 (112 wins)*

• Four-year postseason ban

• Four-year scholarship reduction (10 initial; 20 total)

• Players may transfer and play immediately at other schools

• Athletic department on probation for five years

* Joe Paterno record now 298-136-3; fifth on FBS all-time list

More:

The conference also will place the university on a five-year probation to run concurrently with the NCAA's and has declared the football program ineligible for the Big Ten championship game for the four years in which the NCAA banned the Nittany Lions from postseason play.

Penn State's proceeds from Big Ten bowl revenues from the four years, amounting to an estimated $13 million, will be allocated "to established charitable organizations in Big Ten communities dedicated to the protection of children," the conference said.

Penn State, in a statement released less than an hour after the NCAA sanctions were revealed, said it will accept them and that the "ruling holds the university accountable for the failure of those in power to protect children and insists that all areas of the university community are held to the same high standards of honesty and integrity."

"The tragedy of child sexual abuse that occurred at our university altered the lives of innocent children," Erickson said in the news release. "Today, as every day, our thoughts and prayers continue to be with the victims of Mr. Sandusky and all other victims of child abuse."

Adam Taliaferro, a former player for Paterno who has since recovered from a spinal cord injury he suffered in a 2000 game, expressed frustration in a post on Twitter.

"NCAA says games didn't exist," tweeted Taliaferro, who was elected to Penn State's board of directors in May. "I got the metal plate in my neck to prove it did..I almost died playing 4 PSU..punishment or healing. #WeAre."

The penalties came a day after Penn State removed its Paterno statue outside Beaver Stadium, a decision that came 10 days after a scathing report by former FBI director Louis J. Freeh found that Paterno, with three other top Penn State administrators, had concealed allegations of child sexual abuse made against Sandusky.

SN Voices: Penn State Sanctions

Did the NCAA go too far in punishing Penn State? Did it not go far enough? Was it justified in giving out punishment? Vote

The Freeh report concluded their motive was to shield the university and its football program from negative publicity.

"Today we receive a very harsh penalty from the NCAA and as head coach of the Nittany Lions football program, I will do everything in my power to not only comply, but help guide the university forward to become a national leader in ethics, compliance and operational excellence," Penn State football coach Bill O'Brien said in the statement. "I knew when I accepted the position that there would be tough times ahead. But I am committed for the long term to Penn State and our student athletes."

By vacating 112 Penn State victories from 1998-2011, the sanctions cost Paterno 111 wins. Penn State finished last season 1-3 with Tom Bradley as coach after Paterno was fired in November, days after Sandusky was charged.

Former Florida State coach Bobby Bowden will now hold the top spot in the NCAA record book with 377 major-college wins. Paterno will be credited with 298 wins. Vacated wins are not the same as forfeits -- they don't count as losses or wins for either school.

"I didn't want it to happen like this," Bowden told The Associated Press. "Wish I could have earned it, but that's the way it is."

The late Grambling State coach Eddie Robinson has the overall NCAA Division I record with 408 wins.

The Paterno family released a statement Monday afternoon.

What did Penn State sign?

When Penn State president Rodney Erickson signed the consent decree imposed by the NCAA, he and the school agreed not only to the punishments but also to the monitoring, the supervision and to an enforcement process. This is not just a settlement contract. It is the document that governs enforcement and provides for penalties if Penn State screws up.

These agreements are typically negotiated by two organizations in the middle of a dispute. There is no indication of a negotiation or even a minimal role by Penn State or its president and his lawyers. A typical decree would say that Penn State neither admits nor denies wrongdoing. This decree is all about wrongdoing with Penn State admitting everything.

Consent decrees are ordinarily sterile legal documents, but this one expresses outrage. The decree states the evidence against Penn State "presents an unprecedented failure of institutional integrity leading to a culture in which a football program was held in higher esteem than the values of the institution, the values of the NCAA, the values of higher education, and, most disturbingly, the values of human decency."

Penn State did not negotiate this document. Penn State surrendered to the terms of this document.

It is possible for a wealthy alumnus, a season-ticket holder, a coach, a taxpayer or even a student-athlete to file a lawsuit challenging the sanctions and the consent decree. But any lawsuits are doomed to failure. Erickson's signature on the consent decree means that the university has agreed to the sanctions and to be bound by them for five years.

No one has the standing or the authority to challenge what Erickson and the university have agreed to do. Penn State expressly agrees that it cannot be challenged with "judicial process." Anyone who files a lawsuit would face not only an early dismissal of the case but also the payment of the legal fees incurred by the NCAA and Penn State as they obtain the dismissal. The lawsuit would be an expensive failure.

"The sanctions announced by the NCAA today defame the legacy and contributions of a great coach and educator without any input from our family or those who knew him best," the statement said. "That the president, the athletic director and the board of trustees accepted this unprecedented action by the NCAA without requiring a full due process hearing before the Committee on Infractions is an abdication of their responsibilities."

The scholarship reductions mean that Penn State's roster will be capped at 65 scholarship players within a couple of seasons. The normal scholarship limit for major college football programs is 85. Playing with 20 fewer is crippling to a program that tries to compete at the highest level of the sport.

The NCAA is considering waiving scholarship limits for programs to which Penn State players transfer, provided they reduce proportionately in the next year. For example, the limit is 25 new scholarships per year to a total of 85 scholarships. If the limits are waived in 2012-13 to accommodate one Penn State student-athlete who wishes to transfer to a particular school already at the limits, in 2013-14 the school will be limited to 24 new scholarships and 84 total scholarships.

The NCAA took unprecedented measures with the decision to penalize Penn State without the due process of a Committee on Infractions hearing, bypassing a system in which it conducts its own investigations, issues a notice of allegations and then allows the university 90 days to respond before a hearing is scheduled.

After the hearing, the Infractions Committee then usually takes a minimum of six weeks, but it can take upward of a year to issue its findings.

But in the case of Penn State, the NCAA used the Freeh report -- commissioned by the school's board of trustees -- instead of its own investigation.

"We cannot look to NCAA history to determine how to handle circumstances so disturbing, shocking and disappointing," Emmert said in the statement. "As the individuals charged with governing college sports, we have a responsibility to act. These events should serve as a call to every single school and athletics department to take an honest look at its campus environment and eradicate the 'sports are king' mindset that can so dramatically cloud the judgment of educators."

A former Committee on Infractions chairman and current Division I Appeals Committee member told ESPN. com's Andy Katz on Sunday the NCAA's penalizing of an institution and program for immoral and criminal behavior also breaks new ground.

The former chair, who has been involved with the NCAA for nearly three decades, said he couldn't use his name on the record because the case could come before him and the committee he still serves on in an appeals process.

"This is unique and this kind of power has never been tested or tried," the former chair said. "It's unprecedented to have this extensive power. This has nothing to do with the purpose of the infractions process. Nevertheless, somehow (the NCAA president and executive board) have taken it on themselves to be a commissioner and to penalize a school for improper conduct."

The chair said that the NCAA was dealing with a case that is outside the traditional rules or violations. He said this case does not fall within the basic fundamental purpose of NCAA regulations.

"The purpose of the NCAA is to keep a level playing field among schools and to make sure they use proper methods through scholarships and et cetera," the chair said. "This is not a case that would normally go through the process. It has nothing to do with a level playing field. It has nothing to do with whether Penn State gets advantages over other schools in recruiting or in the number of coaches or things that we normally deal with."

The NCAA, the chair said, had never gotten involved in punishing schools for criminal behavior.

"The criminal courts are perfectly capable of handling these situations," the former chair said. "This is a new phase and a new thing. They are getting into bad behavior that are somehow connected to those who work in the athletic department.

"This is an important precedent. And it should be taken with extreme care."

The NCAA, heavily criticized for its sometimes-ponderous pace in deciding penalties as scandals mounted at Ohio State, Auburn, USC and elsewhere, acted with unprecedented swiftness in arriving at the sanctions for a team that is trying to start over with a new coach and a new outlook.

Emmert had put the Penn State matter on the fast track. Other cases that were strictly about violating the NCAA rulebook have dragged on for months and even years. There was no sign that the infractions committee so familiar to college sports fans was involved this time around as Emmert moved quickly, no doubt aided by the July 12 release of the report by Freeh and what it said about Paterno and the rest of the Penn State leadership.

The investigation focused partly on university officials' decision not to go to child-welfare authorities in 2001 after a coaching assistant told Paterno that he had seen Sandusky sexually abusing a boy in the locker room showers. Penn State officials already knew about a previous allegation against Sandusky by that time, from 1998.

The leaders, the report said, "repeatedly concealed critical facts relating to Sandusky's child abuse from authorities, the university's board of trustees, the Penn State community and the public at large."

Sandusky is awaiting sentencing after being convicted last month of sexually abusing 10 boys over 15 years.

In a cell phone conversation on Monday afternoon, Sandusky's attorney Joe Amendola told ESPN legal analyst Roger Cossack, that Amendola "is disappointed that the NCAA has taken such harsh action before a full and complete legal investigation has occurred."

Amendola, who has yet to speak to Sandusky in reaction to the NCAA sanctions, told Cossack he "is also disappointed in the Penn State Board of Trustees agreeing to a consent decree based on allegations which are currently unsubstantiated involving Joe Paterno and other Penn State administrators."

Emmert had warned Penn State last fall that the NCAA would be examining the "exercise of institutional control" within the athletic department, and said it was clear that "deceitful and dishonest behavior" could be considered a violation of ethics rules. So, too, could a failure to exhibit moral values or adhere to ethics guidelines.

The Freeh report also said that Penn State had "decentralized and uneven" oversight of compliance issues -- laws, regulations, policies and procedures -- as required by the NCAA.

Recent major scandals, such as improper payments to the family of Heisman Trophy winner Reggie Bush while he was at Southern California, and players at Ohio State trading memorabilia for cash and tattoos, have resulted in bowl bans and the loss of scholarships.

Under NCAA rules covering postseason bans, players are allowed to transfer without sitting out a season as long as their remaining eligibility is shorter than or equal to the length of the ban.

Information from ESPN. com senior writers Andy Katz and Mark Schlabach, ESPN's Joe Schad, and The Associated Press was used in this report.

Dating

Dating is a part of human mating process whereby two people meet socially for companionship. beyond the level of friendship. or with the aim of each assessing the other's suitability as a partner in an intimate relationship or marriage. It can be a form of courtship consisting of social activities done by the couple. While the term has several meanings, it usually refers to the act of meeting and engaging in some mutually agreed upon social activity in public, together, as a couple.

History [ edit ]

Dating as an institution is a relatively recent phenomenon which has mainly emerged in the last few centuries. From the standpoint of anthropology and sociology. dating is linked with other institutions such as marriage and the family which have also been changing rapidly and which have been subject to many forces, including advances in technology and medicine. As humans have evolved from hunter-gatherers into civilized societies and more recently into modern societies, there have been substantial changes in the relationship between men and women, with perhaps the only biological constant being that both adult women and men must have sexual intercourse for human procreation to happen. [ 3 ]

Humans have been compared to other species in terms of sexual behavior. Neurobiologist Robert Sapolsky constructed a reproductive spectrum with opposite poles being tournament species. in which males compete fiercely for reproductive privileges with females, and pair bond arrangements, in which a male and female will bond for life. [ 4 ] According to Sapolsky, humans are somewhat in the middle of this spectrum, in the sense that humans form pair bonds, but there is the possibility of cheating or changing partners. [ 4 ] These species-particular behavior patterns provide a context for aspects of human reproduction. including dating. However, one particularity of the human species is that pair bonds are often formed without necessarily having the intention of reproduction. In modern times, emphasis on the institution of marriage, generally described as a male-female bond, has obscured pair bonds formed by same-sex and transsexual couples, and that many heterosexual couples also bond for life without offspring, or that often pairs that do have offspring separate. Thus, the concept of marriage is changing widely in many countries.

Historically, marriages in most societies were arranged by parents and older relatives with the goal not being love but legacy and "economic stability and political alliances", according to anthropologists. [ 5 ] Accordingly, there was little need for a temporary trial period such as dating before a permanent community-recognized union was formed between a man and a woman. While pair-bonds of varying forms were recognized by most societies as acceptable social arrangements, marriage was reserved for heterosexual pairings and had a transactional nature, where wives were in many cases a form of property being exchanged between father and husband, and who would have to serve the function of reproduction. Communities exerted pressure on people to form pair-bonds in places such as Europe ; in China. according to sociologist Tang Can, society "demanded people get married before having a sexual relationship" [ 6 ] and many societies found that some formally recognized bond between a man and a woman was the best way of rearing and educating children as well as helping to avoid conflicts and misunderstandings regarding competition for mates.