SO. Ratings...

You have only played 7 games. You just started. You have very little idea what your actual ratings will be.

Try not to worry about it. If you keep playing, you will soon find other players you have a good chance against.

Really.

Thanks to rating, you can be paired with players of similar strength in random searches. Apart from that, it is always good to see your progress or lack of it.

I remember what that was like, but after you play a long time, you just ignore it. Everyone's rating fluctuates up and down at least 100 points depending on how well they're playing that day (it can be related to mood or lack of sleep etc). So you know that even if you have a bad day, and lose many points, that you'll be back sooner or later.

When I lose a promising game I'm mad because I don't like playing uncharacteristically poorly, not because of my rating. Ratings always rebound.

Rating help match you with people of similar strength. If your upset your rating is going down just try harder.

The real purpose of chess ratings is to flex on your friends and strangers.

The rating on this site, at lease at my level of 800 - 1000, mean absolutely nothing. Either that, or most players at this level are cheating.

The purpose of the ratings should be extremely apparent. It matches players of similar strength. It's something that adds a lot of value to the game. You get to see how good someone really is.  In other games people always cry about their teams holding them back or this and that. You track your progression etc. We all start at the bottom.

It seems you have a lot of rating anxiety or something since you have posted more on the forums than played games.

...What?

Ratings are the best way to date of pairing people you know nothing else about against each other with some degree of equality so both players can get an enjoyable game.  Sometimes they fail -- its not perfect, but its better than nothing.  They fail a lot at the very low end, where a new player can literally watch 2-3 videos or read a few pages and double their skill in a few games, and it fails when someone is tired, intoxicated, distracted, whatever.  It fails if someone had a recent losing streak.  It fails at local clubs where the strongest player or 3 can suck all the points out of the rest of the club, leaving the rest of the club 200+ points down when they have an open tourney or whatever.   But even with the problems, I challenge you to find a better way....  

Fail isn't the right word since it's impossible to factor someones mental state etc into their play, but it shows how they play on average. I think in the end it works damn well. 

This isn't how the Elo system works. It can't suck the rating out of someone that is lower skilled than you, unless the ratings were already comparatively inaccurate. If someone is 200 rating higher than you and you play 100+ games, you should end up very close to where you started, if not almost exactly.