Slipping through the net

It hardly ranks alongside the prophecies of Nostradamus or gypsy Rosie Lee, who turned up annually with Billy Smart's Circus on Wanstead Flats to con the gullible out of a couple of quid to tell them that they were going to meet a 'mysterious stranger', but I was right. My prediction that I would be ignored by every woman that I decided to email on Dating Direct was spot on. Well, almost.

First up was Willow, a 33-year-old from south London. Her profile was, truth be told, pretentious. The first three words were: 'Cuneiform self-advertisement.' Later on, she claimed that she likes 'impeccable grammar and cheekiness'. Now that's a challenge, if ever I've heard one. My email began: 'How could I possibly resist emailing the writer of a profile that starts with a word I had to look up?' A couple of sentences later, I wrote: 'Anyway, impeccable grammar is equally important to me. So as you proclaim to love cheekiness, perhaps I may point out a couple of solecisms in your profile – and even a spelling mistake.' The rest of the email was quite witty and well crafted (and I would confidently state that the grammar was impeccable).

Next was Cheeky Sunflower, a 33-year-old from Baker Street (must be one of Gerry Rafferty's neighbours). She was the first woman that I had ever emailed who didn't have a picture on her profile (although she did when I first put her in my 'favourites', so I knew what she looked like). Her profile was nothing special and gave me no opportunities to be creative. So I just dropped her a line making reference to the many things we had in common. It wasn't a particularly great email, but women without pictures get very little interest, so I imagined that she would be glad of some attention. And if it's the sarcasm (I like to call it banter) that is putting people off (rather than the shiny-faced, toothy-grinned pictures), there was no excuse this time (apart from the fact that I mentioned Will4Adventure ­– that’s another t-shirt you owe me, Legon ­– in reference to the fact that she liked hiking).

Third was Trisha, a 31-year-old from south London. Her profile started: 'I'm fun, caring and cute blah blah blah (who is going to say they are dull, inconsiderate and ugly?) and never sarcastic. Much.' A woman after my own heart. She also said she was looking for 'downright cheekiness'. So I started my email: 'Seeing as I'm struggling to find a dull, inconsiderate and ugly woman, thought I might as well email you.' It was a perfectly good email ­– clever, without being too sarcastic.

Next up was BongoBongo. She had winked at me in May (see 13/05) and when I emailed her, she seemed pretty keen (despite having had lots of winks, she said that she was ‘really glad that I had contacted her’). We exchanged a couple of messages, but as my subscription was about to run out, I gave her my personal email address. But I never heard from her again. Anyway, I sent her a cheeky one-line email about how I told four months ago that you can’t be ‘slightly obsessed’ (it was something we had previously shared a joke about).

Finally, it was the turn of SELondonlass. I would never have stumbled across her profile because she had left so many of the questions unanswered. But she had winked at me a couple of weeks ago. Her profile was one of the best I had read – well written and irreverent – and because it was so rare for me to receive any interest from a London-based, British woman with a picture on her profile, I felt duty bound to contact her. The problem was that not only was she based in an area of town that I wouldn’t travel to even to watch Kelly Brook and Gemma Atkinson in a naked mud-wrestling bout, but (and I’m donning my flak-jacket here, in anticipation of the ‘shallow’ and ‘too choosy’ accusations that are set to be hurled my way), but I didn’t fancy her. I know that thumbnail pictures are never particularly flattering, but you can still get an inkling of what somebody looks like (and bear in mind that people obviously put up their most flattering photos). And although I much prefer curvy women (give me Kate Winslet over Kate Moss every time), SELondonlass looked as if she would tip the scales at twice my weight. Anyway, the email I sent was quite cheeky.

Within 24 hours, all five women had read my emails. They all checked out my profile, with the exception of Willow. As usual, I had contacted women from whom I could realistically expect a response (I live in the right part of the country, am the right age etc). But four days later, I have received only one reply ­­– and it you can guess whom from.

Now don’t get me wrong, SELondonlass (her name is Claire) is a pleasant enough person. She writes pretty decent emails, and although there hasn’t been any banter, in the five irreverent emails to have so far passed between us, we have discussed Miami Vice’s Crockett and Tubbs’ dress sense, car accidents that we have had and the colour of her sofa. All quite entertaining. But in only her second email, Claire managed to reinforce all my earlier fears: ‘Nicole Kidman appears both see-through in acting and physical being (sic). She has become intolerably thin, presenting a completely ridiculous idea of beauty that most young girls cannot begin to emulate in any healthy way.’

I’m laughing about the situation, but in reality, I am beginning to despair. It really pees me off when women who saying they are looking for ‘cheekiness’ don’t even have the courtesy to reply to reply to a tongue-in-cheek email. There is nobody else on the site that I have got the slightest interest in emailing. And nobody in the UK, with a picture on their profile and no children, seems to have any interest in me. I even rewrote my profile to allude to the fact that I am financially secure and that I look younger than I am. But nothing has changed.