I met this girl online and we talked for a couple of weeks. We were supposed to hang out, but she flaked on me.

Last time we talked was about a week ago. I know she is afraid about meeting people from online.

Should I text or call her? What should I say?

-Mike (California)

Dr. Wendy Walsh’s Answer:

Dear Mike,

Call her. Gain her trust.

I agree she should be wary about meeting people online, so suggest a group event where you each bring a friend and meet in a public place.

No counseling or psychotherapy advice: The Site does not provide psychotherapy advice. The Site is intended only for use by consumers in search of general information of interest pertaining to problems people may face as individuals and in relationships and related topics. Content is not intended to replace or serve as substitute for professional consultation or service. Contained observations and opinions should not be misconstrued as specific counseling advice.

Conducted by Monica Whitty, with the University of Leicester, and Tom Buchanan, with the University of Westminster, the study found even when victims felt suspicious when an online match asked for money, they still fulfilled the request.

Researchers said since 2007, nearly 230,000 individuals in the U.K. have been the victim of fraud stemming from their use of online dating sites.

Most scams followed the same pattern, with the victim engaging in an online-only relationship with another user, deepening their emotional bond and connection until the other user asks the victim for money.

“Even when victims felt suspicious when

asked for money, they still fulfilled the request.”

According to the study, users asking others for money are almost always a part of a criminal organization that creates fake profiles in the hopes of taking advantage of single people.

After accumulating and reviewing the data, Whitty said it’s up to the dating companies to provide users with the necessary tools and information needed to stay safe.

“Daters need to be told, from the moment they sign up, that if a person is not willing to meet them in the first month, they should move on,” she said. “They also need to be told never to respond to requests for money. Dating companies could target advice at particularly vulnerable individuals, especially those with high romantic ideals, previous mental health problems or a history of abuse.”

Source: Cision.com. Photo source: in.com.

Months later, he broke into her home, waited in her garage and stabbed her 10 times in an attempt to kill her.

She was in the hospital for months with several painful reconstructive surgeries.

In her lawsuit against Match.com, she says the site doesn’t do enough to warn people, especially women, that users could be dangerous.

She claims the site promotes an illusion that it is facilitating healthy long-term relationships.

Match.com calls the lawsuit absurd.

Here is what is obvious.

No one is going to argue what this woman went through isn’t horrendous, terrifying and tragic.

Call me a hard nose, but I side with Match.com on this one. The lawsuit is ridiculous.

It is stories like this that give online dating the seedy, scary undertone it’s been fighting to overcome since its inception.

A study came out recently that said experts agreed the “stigma” of online dating was over. Whatever that meant.

But between this story and last week’s story on Manti Te’o, I am sure a lot of ignorant people have solidified some opinions against using online dating, afraid of the reality of who it is they are meeting.

“When first meeting someone, you need

to practice reasonable precautions.”

Here is why you shouldn’t be scared.

A concession:

Considering online dating is my livelihood, do I have an interest in countering any argument against its usage? Sure.

But don’t let the source derail the validity of the points.

1. Online dating is just a catalyst.

Online dating isn’t your mom. It isn’t a matchmaker. And it certainly isn’t Big Brother.

You shouldn’t look to it to be your nanny or protector. Online dating introduces you to people you wouldn’t have access to otherwise. That’s it.

2. Evil will choose any avenue.

Sounds like George W. Bush line, but it’s true. Even if you pre-screen users with background checks, that doesn’t guarantee your safety. There is no “This person is a future psycho” predictor.

Some sites like True.com do offer the selling point all users are validated/background checked and are who they say they are.

Don’t let this lure you into a false feeling of security. The guy who attacked this woman had no prior record.

3. Don’t assume you know someone.

How many times have you seen the newscaster interview the friend of the crazy attacker and they say, “I had no idea he could do this. He seemed like the nicest person!”

Let’s take a look back at some notable and surprising killers:

• Ted Bundy: handsome, charming and very intelligent. A suicide hotline volunteer. That’s what a serial killer looks like?
• BTK (Bind, Torture, Kill) Killer: “Happily married” with kids! President of his church and Boy Scout leader. That’s what a serial killer looks like?
• Robert Yates Jr.: Career Army man with several medals. Also a serial killer.

4. Everywhere is dangerous.

Let’s use the old “bar vs. online dating” argument.

Do you think one has more instances of date rape? Of violent occurrences?

I am not saying a bar is a bad place to meet someone. Lots of marriages and solid relationships have occurred between people who met in bars.

I am saying you need to be careful wherever you are. Unfortunately, this woman could have met this man at a peace rally with the same result.

5. You are responsible for you.

No one is looking out for you more than you, ever. When first meeting someone, you need to practice reasonable precautions.

There are a lot of easy things you can do when getting to know someone!

• Meet in public.
• Don’t give your last name.
• Don’t allow them to pick you up or drop you off.
• Don’t leave your drink unprotected.
• Call from a blocked number (*67 still works, folks).
• You can set up an alternate phone number through Google Voice that routes to your cell. I do it.
• Tell your friends where you are, who you’re with and about what time you’ll be home.
• Don’t go anywhere alone with someone new.
• Keep a code word to tell a trusted friend when you’ve made it back safely.
• Lock your doors.
• Don’t overindulge in alcohol.

None of this is meant to scare you, but if it informs you to the realities of life and leads you to take precautions, then this article has served its purpose.

Does all of this mean online dating is unsafe? It means it is neither safe nor unsafe.

Just like any part of life, there are no such things as guarantees.

One definition of a psychopath is “a person suffering from a chronic mental disorder with abnormal social behavior.”

As with any mental illness, it can be hard to diagnose. It’s not as though it is displayed with any physical tells like a limp, twitch or anything immediately noticeable.

It’s something that creeps up on you without you realizing.

There are psychopaths out there in the dating world. Heck, I even dated one and had to extract myself out of a difficult relationship.

Psychologist Robert Hare developed a ratings scale for psychopathy. You can find it through most good Internet search engines.

There are varying degrees of psychopathy, and 15 percent of the American population comes up on the spectrum.

But don’t let this scare you out of going into the dating world, just be aware of the traits.

Psychopathic behaviors aren’t immediately apparent.

At first they come across as charming and sincere and you will build up a quick rapport with them.

He will hang on your every word and will connect with you on almost every level. You’ll spend more time together, and he’ll be charming with your friends in an “insincere” way.

After a short period, you will be spending a lot of time with him and start to lose contact with your social group.

But isn’t that what happens in relationships? To a certain extent, yes.

However, in regular relationships, your partner doesn’t try to monopolize your time and track your every move. This attention can be flattering at first, but soon it becomes stifling.

There are a variety of tells and traits to look out for. Here are just a few.

“When inconsistencies start to emerge,

then it’s time to walk away.”

1. Your date lies — small lies, big lies.

When you point out inconsistency, they will lie again to cover up the other lies.

2. You feel pressured to do things you don’t want to do.

Small things and larger things that really don’t sit well. You do them because you fear them being unhappy with you.

3. You feel controlled and isolated from friends and family.

At first you may just think you are in love.

However, when you attempt to arrange things independently, you will experience his displeasure, which will make you cancel plans and you’ll be rewarded with gratitude.

4. Your date tells you they love you.

But their actions don’t fit with love, respect and emotional connections.

5. Your date doesn’t recognize right or wrong.

Either with you, your relationship, work or social settings. You may find them causing a scene in public so they can get to be alone with you.

6. Someone else is always to blame.

It might be you or someone else, but it’s never, ever them.

So what to do if you find yourself dating a psychopath?

My recommendation is when inconsistencies start to emerge, and your attempts to open a discussion about his behavior are dismissed or result in you being blamed (or another cloud of lies starts to form), then it’s time to walk away.

I dated a psychopathic boyfriend for nine months, and it took another year to completely remove him from my life after I ended the relationship.

No matter how you try to tell yourself you can deal with the situation, ask yourself one question:

Can you imagine living with this behavior for the rest of your life?

If the answer is no, then you deserve someone better.

These men were a brave bunch of dudes.

They were brave because they spoke out against a cultural myth that all boys, teens and men like sex — any kind of sex under any kind of circumstance.

And they expressed the confusion they felt because they’d been taught this myth and then were later psychologically coerced or aggressively violated by a woman.

Often the woman was much older and the boy a mere teen who was under her care or under some sort of power dynamic that made it impossible for him to say no.

Other times it was an aggressive woman who used date rape drugs and Viagra as her weapons of rape.

In most cases, the men felt traumatized and, because of the cultural myth, felt helpless to talk about it or reach out for help.

Female sexual predators are rare, but the numbers are unclear because so few men and boys report their crimes.

Women who use social power or chemical weapons to obtain sex with a man (or woman) are as much violent criminals as a male rapist.

“The idea of male rape is

not fodder for snickers.”

So let me make this clear.

The word “no” should be respected no matter the gender of the person. Before any two people enter a sexual encounter, they must be peers who can each give verbal consent.

The idea of male rape is not fodder for snickers. It is a serious crime.

And the wounds of physical and emotional trauma are just as visceral in a male victim of rape as a female victim.

In some ways, it is worse because there are few people they can talk to and few men get the sympathy and therapy they deserve.

My hat goes off to the amazing, evolved men who are beginning to express themselves on this very tender topic.

Here’s the link to the HuffPostLive Show: http://on.aol.com/partner/hp-live-segments-517394847/videoId=517555474

A new study published by Deinera Exner-Cortens in the Pediatrics journal looked at more than 5,000 teenagers in the United States and asked them whether or not they were in a violent relationship.

Twenty percent of respondents (male and female) reported psychological violence within their relationship, while 10 percent of females and 8 percent of males noted the violence was both psychological and physical.

“Ten percent of females and 8 percent of males noted

the violence was both psychological and physical.”

Five years after this initial survey was conducted, Exner-Cortens returned to her respondents to see whether or not their teenage trauma impacted their adult relationships. She found teens that experienced violent relationships were between two to three times more likely to enter into violent relationships as adults.

While women tended to be on the receiving end of negative power imbalances within their relationships, both men and women suffered lasting damage from their violent teen relationships, though that damage manifested itself in different ways.

Women were more likely to indulge in dangerous activities, including smoking and excessive drinking. Women were also more likely to feel depressed or suicidal, especially in response to their relationships.

Men were also likely to feel suicidal, but they were also more likely to engage in delinquent activities and indulge in anti-social behavior.

Source: Pediatrics journal.

A recent online survey, conducted by Harvard researcher Justin Lehmiller, questioned 376 people on their dating and sex lives, approximately half of whom were in traditional monogamous relationships and the other half engaging in a casual friends-with-benefits relationship with at least one person.

While neither group reported perfect condom use, those in casual relationships were far more likely to use condoms when they had sex than those in monogamous relationships.

“Though friends-with-benefits couples use condoms

more often, they are more likely to have multiple partners.”

However, Lehmiller cautioned that increased condom use among casual relationships didn’t necessarily make those relationships healthier. While individuals in casual relationships may use condoms more often, they’re unlikely to use condoms all the time. Considering the fact people in casual relationships are far less likely to be monogamous than people in traditional relationships, Lehmiller concluded, “Larger numbers of partners, combined with far-from-perfect condom use and limited discussion about sexual health matters, suggest that [friends-with-benefits relationships] carry some inherent degree of risk.”

Lehmiller also noted his research suggested that individuals in casual relationships indicated lower degrees of sexual satisfaction and less communication regarding sex between partners than individuals in traditional relationships. Furthermore, Lehmiller suggested less frequent condom usage between partners in a traditional relationship is due to increased trust levels more than a decreased sense of responsibility.

Photo source: guim.co.uk

Results from a survey initiated by Knowledge Networks aims to shine a light on a disturbing reality many college women find themselves experiencing, often without any idea how to end the abuse or how to seek the help they need.

“Forty-three percent of college women surveyed

said they had been in an abusive relationship.”

In fact, according to the survey, 38 percent of the 330 college women surveyed stated they wouldn’t know where to seek help on campus if they ended up in an abusive situation. This news is troubling on its own, but even more worrying is the study found 43 percent of the college women they surveyed had already found themselves in an abusive relationship, with a distressing 22 percent of college women surveyed reporting physical violence, sexual abuse or threats of physical violence.

Unfortunately, these findings match up with previous studies looking into the dating lives of college women. These studies indicate that not only have most college women experienced abuse at some point in their dating life, but more than half (57 percent) of those women experienced the abuse while they were in college.

No survey about abuse in college relationships has ever indicated college students feel supported by their institution or know where and how to seek help in the event of abuse.

These surveys indicate educating college women on abuse needs to be a more prominent element of their experience at school, especially considering that despite the fact 52 percent of college women report knowing someone who suffered abuse, 57 percent of college students find it difficult to identify an abusive relationship when they see one.

Photo source: wisegeek.com

Conducted by University of Colorado School of Public Health professor Sheanna Bull, the study looked at the behavior of 800 high school and college students. For two months, some of those students were assigned to receive regular updates within their Facebook feed aimed toward promoting safe sex practices, while the other participants received normal feed updates.

Follow-up surveys, which were given between two and six months after the study concluded, found students given the safe sex updates reported increased condom usage. However, Bull noted the increased condom usage reported by students exposed to the safe sex message was both slight and likely to be temporary.

“Though effective, researchers believe that safe

sex through social media promotion is short-lived.”

Furthermore, engagement fell below what Bull expected and desired. A number of participants exposed to the safe sex message opted out over the course of the study and the participants receiving these status updates rarely liked or commented on the messages. Instead, as Bull notes, “teens largely consumed the information passively — seeing it appear in their news feed — rather than visiting the ‘Just/Us’ page itself.”

Bull’s study suggested a variety of reasons why using social media to impact teen sexual behavior is difficult. One had to do with the development of the prefrontal cortex, the region of the brain related to impulse control, which doesn’t fully mature until as late as 25 years of age. Another reason Bulls cites is the potential stigmatization of teenagers seen to actively participate with safe sex organizations through public channels such as Facebook’s news feed.

Photo source: onsugar.com

The study draws its conclusions by evaluating data from the California Health Interview Survey between 2007 and 2008. In addition to finding bisexual women at higher risk for domestic violence than other women, the study also found that gay men experienced a higher risk of suffering from domestic violence than heterosexual and bisexual men, as well as men who have had sex with men yet do not identify themselves as gay or bisexual.

“Ninety-five percent of bisexual women who suffered abuse

in their relationships suffered that abuse from a male partner.”

However, the study notes that, regardless of identification, the abusive partner in nearly every case of domestic violence is a male. The study found 95 percent of bisexual women who suffered abuse in their relationships suffered that abuse from a male partner, while 97 percent of cases where a male suffered abuse within a relationship their abusive partner was also male.

The question of what connects sexual orientation and domestic violence remains unanswered, as the study found no clear reason for this correlation, but supported previous findings that domestic violence was best predicted through certain partner behaviors (such as binge drinking) and through a partner’s psychological state (current or a past history of psychological distress).

Previous studies, including a study by David Frost published in the Journal of Social Issues, may shine some light on the issue, suggesting that even though LGBT individuals and couples value their romantic relationships to at least the same degree as heterosexual couples, LGBT couples feel less socially and culturally supported and validated than heterosexual couples, illuminating some of the potential psychological and relationship problems raised by anti-gay legislation and a general anti-gay cultural climate.