经济衰退，但“网恋”繁荣

TiffanyLin

Online-dating websites prosper in the recession

NOT many industries are doing well in the recession. But along with discount retailers and pawnbrokers, online-dating sites such as eHarmony.com and OkCupid.com have seen business look up. There are several theories to explain why. It may be that people have more time to devote to their private lives as the economy slows; that uncertain times increase the desire for companionship; or that living alone is expensive, whereas couples can split many of their costs.

“People who have been single for years are suddenly focused on finding someone,” says Greg Waldorf, the boss of eHarmony, a wholesome marriage-oriented site with more than 20m paying subscribers. He favours the companionship-in-hard-times theory: “Going through difficult times with someone special is better than doing it alone.” In a recent survey carried out for his company, 25% of women said stress about the state of the economy made them more inclined to seek a long-term relationship. The company also noticed that the number of visits to its website was higher than average on days when the Dow Jones Industrial Average fell by more than 100 points.

At OkCupid, which is aimed at a more casual, youthful crowd, there has been a jump in membership since the financial crisis set in, and an even bigger jump in how often members use the site. Back in September, users were sending 6,000 on-site instant messages a day, says Sam Yagan, OkCupid’s boss. Now that number is over 18,000. OkCupid has the advantage of being free, which has proved popular with people looking for partners for what Mr Yagan euphemistically calls “cheap entertainment”. After all, if you have a girlfriend or a boyfriend, he says, “you can just play Scrabble instead of going out for the evening.”

But perhaps the boom is the result of neither a nesting instinct, nor a desire to save money. AshleyMadison.com, a very different type of dating site, is also doing well. Instead of arranging marriages, the subscription-based site arranges affairs—and never before have so many people been looking for a bit on the side. AshleyMadison’s boss, Noel Biderman, thinks his site, and others, are prospering for another reason: money problems. “The majority of relationship discord stems from economic troubles,” he says. Instead of fighting, married people are taking stock of their lives. “They want to do something that makes them feel better about themselves,” Mr Biderman says, “and $49 is a tiny expenditure for a life-altering affair.”

“网恋”在经济衰退中繁荣

没有多少企业在经济衰退之中表现出色。但是，和一些打折零售商以及一些典当商们一样，约会网站比如eHarmony.com 和 OkCupid.com的生意看涨。有几个理论来解释其中的缘由：1）随着经济的衰退，人们可能拥有更多的时间投入到个人的情感生活中；2）经济衰退时期的不确定性增强了人们获得伴侣的渴望；3）独自生活成本太高，而“结伴”生活能平摊很多支出。

eHarmony是一个以介绍婚姻为目的的健康网站，目前拥有超过2千万的付费订阅者，该网站的老板Greg Waldorf说：“那些单身了多年的人突然想找伴侣了。” Greg Waldorf赞同“患难伴侣”理论，他说：“与伴侣共渡时艰要比自己一个人孤单承受好。”在最近一次对他的公司进行的调查中发现，25%的女性说经济状况的压力促使她们更加想寻找一份长期的感情关系。该公司也注意到，当道琼斯工业平均指数（Dow Jones Industrial Average）跌幅超过100点的时候，访问该网站的网民数量要比平时高。

另外一个约会网站OkCupid的目标群体是一些更加随意的年轻人，自从金融危机以来，这个网站的会员数目大幅增加，而且会员们使用该网站的频率增加更多。OkCupid的老板Sam Yagan说，在去年的9月份会员们一天发送了6000条网上即时信息。现在这个数字已经超过了18000。免费是OkCupid的一个优势，这使得该网站在那些如Yagan先生雅称的为找伴侣获得“便宜娱乐”的人群中很流行。Yagan说: “毕竟，如果你有一个女朋友或者男朋友的话，你们就可以一起玩Scrabble了，而不必在傍晚出门了。”

不过或许约会网站的繁荣既不是人们有成家本能的结果，也不是想节省钱的结果。AshleyMadison.com是一个类型非常不同的约会网站，目前经营也非常好。该网站也是一个收费的订阅网站，但是这个网站不是为婚姻牵线搭桥，而是提供婚外情服务---此前从来没有如此多的人光顾该网站。AshleyMadison的老板Noel Biderman认为他的网站以及其它类似网站的繁荣在于另外一个原因：钱的问题。他说：“大部分婚姻关系的不和来自于经济纠纷。”已婚人士遇到婚姻问题的时候不是互相争斗，而是仔细考虑如何对待他们的生活。Biderman 先生说：“他们想做一些让他们自己感觉更好的一些事情，因此对于一次改变生活的婚外情来说，49美元只不过是非常小的一笔开销了。”

Vocabulary:

Prosper：繁荣
Recession：经济衰退
Discount：打折
Pawnbroker：典当商
Companionship：陪伴
Wholesome：健康的；有益的
Subscriber：订阅者
Incline：倾向于
Euphemistically：委婉地
Boom：繁荣
Nesting：筑巢
Instinct：本能
Affair：婚外情
Discord：不和睦；纷争
Take stock of: 仔细考虑
Tiny: 微小的
Expenditure: 开销
Life-altering: 改变生活的（编辑：胡慧）

注释：

Scrabble是西方流行的英语文字图版游戏，在一块15×15方格的图版上，2至4名参加者拼出词汇而得分。词汇以填字游戏的方式横竖列出，并必须收录在专用的词典里。不同字母有不同分数，是根据在标准书写英语中出现频率订定，如经常出现的E和O只值1分，但不常用的Q和Z则值10分。图版上有不同颜色的格子，参加者可从中获得额外分数。（根据维基百科的解释）

（注：英文原文来自The Economist 《经济学人》http://www.economist.com）