Archive for the ‘Personals’ Category

My spiteful valentine

Thursday, February 14th, 2013

As if the insipid commercialism of Valentine’s Day isn’t bad enough, let’s harken back to a time when used the occasion to rip one another limb from limb. Yay?

Woebegone sex

Wednesday, February 13th, 2013

Bad sex is awful enough. But there’s something particularly pernicious about bad sex with a person who believes it to be good sex, am I right?

image

I’m not arguing for debasement. But the thing is, if you believe your herky-jerky moves to be smooth, then there’s little-to-no hope of improvement. Because, look, we’re not fucking in Lake Wobegon: Some of you are subpar.

My nerdy valentine

Saturday, February 9th, 2013

As if you needed proof that Washingtonians are dorks, look we can even wonk-ify romance.

Crazy like a bride

Saturday, February 2nd, 2013

Sorry, but planning your wedding years in advance — and I mean planning, not merely daydreaming — before you even have a husband seems to me like a good a guarantee as any that you won’t ever acquire one. Because you’re crazy.

Vulcan seeking earthling

Saturday, January 19th, 2013

We’ve got Christian Mingle, JDate, Nerve personals — I guess it was probably inevitable that there should be not one but two sites to connect lovelorn Trekkies, too. Even Spock got lonely, right? Right? Clearly, not my thing.

If I was snarkier, I’d point out no one could claim that the Internet had robbed such people of their social skills. After all, the Klingons weren’t known for their social graces, right? Right?

Age discrimination?

Friday, January 18th, 2013

It turns out that the reason that older men sleep with younger women is because women their own age think they are fat, wrinkly, and too old.

And you thought it was because they were horn dogs.

(Half) in the closet

Tuesday, January 15th, 2013

I think we all — or many of us — can agree: There’s no reason why movie stars should have to share their sexuality, no more than non-famous people. Reciting lines in front of a camera doesn’t mean you lose your right to privacy, and stars have no responsibility to open up, at least not for purient reasons. Doing so in order to serve as a role model to others is admirable but not required.

That’s why I’m not sure how to feel about Jodie Foster kinda, sorta coming out during her speech at the Golden Globes the other night. She all but said she was a lesbian, all the while lamenting that sexuality is no longer a private matter. But at this point in her career, it kind of is for Foster. Frankly I can’t exactly see the impetutus. Just because she was standing in front of a microphone? It’s not like softball-pitching reporters who cover the award shows were going to force her to ‘fess up.

What’s more, I’m unsure of the message we’re all supposed to take away from her speech. Because, yes, years ago, movie stars didn’t get up and announce their sexuality. But some do, and do so not because they are being hounded but because they want to, admirably. She almost seems to chide: “I’m told that every celebrity is expected to honor the details of their private life with a press conference, a fragrance and a primetime reality show.”

More confusing, however, is her portrait of the past as “very quaint days when a fragile young girl would open up to trusted friends and family and co-workers.” Maybe the young girl would guard that information, keep it close, because, hey, in those “quaint days” it wasn’t okay to be gay?

I resolve…

Sunday, January 13th, 2013

My new New Year’s resolution: To not be intimidated by the coolness of other people’s resolutions!

eDisharmony

Thursday, January 10th, 2013

So whaddya know…online dating is responsible for war, sickness, pestilence — and also is “threatening monogamy.”

How are we so sure? Well, see, there’s this loser named Jake, and thanks to online sites, he’s able to date a half-dozen women at a time, despite the fact that he’s “lazy, aimless, and irresponsible with money.” According to The Atlantic:

What if online dating makes it too easy to meet someone new? What if it raises the bar for a good relationship too high? What if the prospect of finding an ever-more-compatible mate with the click of a mouse means a future of relationship instability, in which we keep chasing the elusive rabbit around the dating track?

Yeah, what if? Then some poor woman might have settled and would be stuck with this tool Jacob ’til death — or divorce papers — do them part. Or, here’s my bet: Maybe he’d have dated some women he met offline…and they’d have eventually dumped his sorry ass, too.

I sound like I’m picking on Jacob, and that’s not wholly fair. He just seems like a dud. Rather, I’m peeved at the premise of the piece, which is yet another example of a male writer presuming women think like men. You know, with our penises. Newsflash, gentlemen: We don’t have dicks, so we’re forced to use our brains.

Just because the Internet connects us in a different way, with different partners, doesn’t mean that we become fundamentally changed people, looking for radically altered things from relationships. Maybe Jacob just wanted some girl with whom he could have sex and watch football — and not marry. Women, mostly, are going online because they’re looking for the same things they always wanted, compatibility, perhaps stability. (Or at least a meal.) It transforms the means, not the end goal.

Cyrano.com

Monday, January 7th, 2013

Facebook has made us shitty friends. Because of text messaging we can’t rit good. Now that everyone has an iPod, we never take out our earbuds and just talk on the subway — you know, like we all used to do back in the day.

Forgive me if I start to feel like we’re in the midst of some sort of Luddite backlash. If you can’t blame Canada, then pin it on technology. The latest is the theory that the popularity of online dating has made us lousy at doing so in the real world.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again — I’m kind of a skeptic about online dating. But that’s because I’m unconvinced that someone else (or a computer program) can match you properly. I’m also dubious about yentas and blind dates. However, I find the notion that, in some sort of dating Golden Age, every man used to be suave and debonair, and every woman the perfect partner, even more preposterous. Cyrano wrote terrific love poems but had a big nose. For all his romantic gestures, Don Juan slept around. Romeo — well, we know what happened there.

The leerer, the groper, the cute guy across the bar too shy to say hello — none are the creation of Match.com. eHarmony didn’t invent bad pick-up lines. Dating isn’t easy in the digital era, but it never was.