Dating, Part Deux?

Ok, so since I last blogged about dating, one of the ads that showed up on the bottom of my site read:

plentyoffish.com

We delete members unfit to date!

Now, praytell, what makes one 'unfit to date'?  Don't get me wrong, I know what makes one unfit to date (controlling, still in love with an ex, commitment phobic, selfish, sadistic, immature, stop me before I go on forever).   

Now, someone with more experience than me feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, I don't have any experience with dating sites (and I'm not saying this to try to sound cool) - but is there anything one could say about oneself in a self-created dating profile that would indicate one is 'undateable'?   What, in their book, red-flags someone?  I can only assume one wouldn't describe oneself as immature, selfish, etc. 

I guess what amuses me most - maybe this site is trying to publicize itself as having a high quality of people on it - however, I do think this campaign might hurt it a little.   I think some people who have turned to online dating like not having a to deal with facing rejection.  Or, at least the sting of rejection is somewhat subdued seeing that it happens in cyberspace.  

I would think one who seriously fears rejection would be afraid of trying said site.   How bad would it feel to be rejected by a dating site?   It's not that one person doesn't want to date you, the entire dating community doesn't want to have you!

Conversely - I think the commercials for the chemistry.com website, which spoke about how they don't reject anyone but eharmony sent these seemingly normal, attractive, successful people "Dear John" letters, really hit the nail on the head for those who fear rejection.   I guess though, sites like these that don't reject anyone can boast they are carrying any and every weirdo out there.  

Thoughts?

Dating

So, now, is it just me, or isn't dating one of the most awkward things out there?  Aren't first dates just the worst? Now, I'm not saying that I don't like dating.  It's fine once things get comfortable.  It's a necessary evil to finding happiness.  However - a friend of mine and I were discussing some dilemmas.

What if, on a first date, one is to see a movie?   A BAD movie.... Afterwards, there's always some compulsion to talk about the movie.  What's one to say?  Especially if the other person either treated for the movie or merely suggested the movie...does it look ungrateful to say "that was the WORST movie I've ever seen!"  Does it sound like one is having a bad time?  I would think, then, the inviter would feel awkwardly guilty.  He or she might feel compelled to apologize, even though, hopefully, it was completely unintentional.  Come to think of it, I can think of a couple movies that I'd like show to some of my worst enemies while they are tied down in a room alone in front of a tv.  

However, if one hates the movie, but, to seem nice and grateful and pleasant, says "it was pretty good" - it might come off as though this person has bad taste in movies.  If I were to see a God-awful movie with someone I don't know all that well and he were to say he liked it - I'd definitely think 'no way.  there's no way I can put of with this for the next however many years of my life'.  Also, if both parties hate the movie - then there's something to bond about - similar taste - however, there are risks of coming off a certain way if one is too honest.  Is it better to be honest and seem like a jerk with good taste, or to be a nice person with bad taste?   Which kind of person is worse to date?

I know some people will simply say a movie is not a good choice for a first date (you don't get to talk much to actually get to know each other).  However, I kind of think the same goes for other kinds of dates - like if you go out for a dinner and it ends up that you don't like what you ordered (or don't like the restaurant).  If you choke it down and say it's good - you run the risk of "I know!! I LOVE this place.  I come here all the time - let's come back next week!!"  What does one do?  Should she (or he) be blatantly honest?

Sigh.   

F*R*I*E*N*D*S?

So there's some quiz circulating the internet/facebook/etc. - "Which Friends character are you?"

I think I took it and it declared me Rachel.  Now, not that I have any beefs with that.  However,  I think it's blatantly clear which Friends character I am.

"I'm not so good with the advice...can I interest you in a sarcastic comment?"

Just My Feelings....

So I've received an e-mail forward multiple times that goes something like this:

It is said that
86% of Americans believe in God.. Therefore I have a very hard time
understanding why there is such a problem in having 'In God We Trust' on our
money and having 'God' in the Pledge of Allegiance. Why don't we just tell the
14% to BE QUIET!!!

Now, I'm not commenting on removing (the word) God from the Pledge of Allegiance or money.  I'm not commenting on my own personal beliefs.  I'm not commenting on agreeing or  disagreeing with this statement.  I'm not commenting on the content of this statement.

With one exception.

Is is just me, or is there something about the notion "you're in the minority with your belief, therefore you should shut up" a little....un-American?

Did Anyone Happen to Notice?

....lately, at fast food restaurants, if you ask for a cup of water (instead of shelling out $2 for a pop, or $3 for bottled water), they give you the SMALLEST cup you've ever seen?  Some restaurants will give you a standard size plastic cup, sure, but a lot have taken to the dixie cup with a lid.  Where do they find these tiny lids?  They have to be specially made. 

So, at said restaurants, one now has three choices - 1) constantly getting up for a refill mid-meal (kind of annoying), 2) splurging on buying a beverage (which have a HUGE profit margin for the company), or 3) really rationing one's sips.  

I think next time I'm offered a dollhouse sized cup of water, I'm going to ask for a spare five.  If all the other water drinkers do this, it'll increase companies' costs and perhaps encourage them to shy away from said ridiculous new practice.  Who's with me?!

Between Barack and a Hard Place

Did John McCain really vote against a bill requiring health insurance companies to cover birth control if they're covering freaking viagra!?!?!! This feminist is having a VERY hard time with that. Despite my dislike for Obama, I better stop with the jokes....

Well, let me squeeze one in....

Q: How many Barack Obamas does it take to change a lightbulb?

A: None. He hopes it will change itself.

Battle of the Bloggers

So the other day, I wrote this post about dating and romance.

My good and long time friend Matt wrote a comment in response - scroll down on the above link to see it.  I'd like to debate some interesting points he brought up.  

He asked the question - is this really a broken system that needs to be fixed?

My thoughts - is it a broken system?  In some ways, yes.  Can it be fixed?  That's a more complicated question.

Here's the main dilemma for women that I see in the old fashioned system - it's a lot about sitting around and waiting to be picked by a man; it's not the mutual selection process I think dating, ideally, should be.  

Matt (and other men) will probably argue here that it is a mutual selection process - women can say no to being asked out, marriage proposals, etc. - they have a choice in the matter.  Also, there's the point that having to be the one putting it all out there and asking another out, wearing one's heart on one's sleeve, having to face rejection - it's no picnic in the park for a guy at times.

However - let's look at it for a girl - what is she supposed to do if there's a guy she likes (we have thoughts, feelings, attractions and preferences too) - if he isn't asking her out, is she supposed to sit there silently and assume if he wanted her, he'd say so?  What if he is shy?  How come men can go after whom they want but women can't?  Isn't this system all about sitting and waiting to be picked?  Isn't there some old truism the importance of taking action to get what one wants?

So, the system has evolved (perhaps) - somewhere somehow it suddenly became acceptable for women to pursue men - and it started happening.  Also, it suddenly became acceptable for women to casually sleep with men they might not be in a serious relationship with, to live with their boyfriends without being married, etc.  

Now, I have often crudely stated that the modern woman can fuck anyone she wants - but ultimately she has only fucked herself.  I think one of the biggest perks of monogamy, for men, was physical intimacy - however, now men can get easily find a one night stand in a bar - men can get some of the best perks of a relationship without one.  

Also, with a lot of couples living together and basically having all the perks of a marriage (minus the legal technicalities) - what's the motivation to take an extra step and tie the knot?  I've actually heard stories of couples who have decided to tie the knot because one person in the relationship has lost a job and needs health insurance - that's pretty far from romantic, in my book.  I think women - generally speaking - have more enthusiasm for tying the knot - but what's a woman to do other than sit and wait for a proposal from her man?  

Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not saying there aren't a good amount of men out there who still value monogamy, relationships and marriage - I know they're still out there.  However, as the dating system has evolved over the past 40 or 50 years, are women any better off?  In romantic relationships between men and women - are women still sitting and waiting on men to act?  (<--I'd like to refer to this line as a "Carrie Bradshawism".)

Matt (and others) - I expect a response.  

20something Blues?

According to Cosmo (insert Jay Leno's "my bible" joke here), a new study shows that recent college grads are more likely to be depressed than their older counterparts.  

Now, speaking from my personal experience - I felt it myself in the first year after graduation.  After having been in a place where I lived on my own (well, so to speak, with several peer roommates) with maybe two to three hours of class a day (I remember distinctly thinking I had no idea how I'd gotten through one day of high school because more than four hours of class seemed intolerable) to come back to live with my parents (as many of us do - for those of us who don't - money is ubertight) and go back to the 9-5 M-F grind if we were lucky enough to even find a (guarantee-ably low-paying) job felt like a step backwards - or at least a step into a much less happy place than the permanent spring break trip that, at times, college is. 

(Sidenote:  yes, I really really like parentheses.  They are almost my favorite punctuation mark, second only to the beloved dash.)

The real world is rough.  The transition is  brutal.  My question is this - is there anything that can ease the blow?  Is circumstance the sole cause of depression?  What can we do to eliminate these college grad blues?  

If I'd Known Then....

So, I read a book and now I shall review it - as usual.  

The book - "If I'd Known Then: Women in Their 20s and 30s write Letters to Their Younger Selves" edited by Ellyn Spragins.   In short, it contains a bunch of short chapters (3-7 pages) which starts with a brief explanation of some period of turmoil or challenge in her younger years and then her letter.  There are some major heavy hitters featured in the book - Jessica Alba, Sasha Cohen, Natasha Bedingfield, and some business bigwigs who might not carry the name recognition.

Now, I definitely found most of the women's stories interesting - not necessarily their personal struggle but their path to success.  As usual, I liked the format of short stories (this could lead to a lot of potential snide comments about my attention span, etc.).  

However, a couple criticisms.  I honestly wasn't all that impressed with the letters.  There seemed to be one constant message every woman was saying to herself - 'hey, hang in there'.  All of the advice almost every woman offered herself was, for the most part, predictable.   

Although I liked the short format - perhaps it was too abbreviated for the reader to be able to fully grasp this woman and her situation - it all comes off as general vague truisms.  At times it seems as though this woman has truly written the letter to herself, meant for no one else to see, and it was somehow snatched from her home like a sex tape stolen by the paparazzi - the nicknames, references to (presumably) inside jokes - there was something about some of the letters that left the reader outside the woman's circumstance.

I must say, I can only assume the book was meant to be inspirational; although I enjoyed reading it, I wasn't particularly inspired.  Perhaps part of the issue was that, although it explained the women's success, it didn't explain the journey there, nor did it really explain how these women overcame these points of adversity in their lives - it merely identified the situation and then came the 'ooh ooh child, things are gonna get easier' note.  

I guess another qualm I have with the book, in general - most of these women's 'traumas' weren't all that interesting or out of the ordinary.  The only ones that really stuck out to me - Aimee Mullins (an athlete/actress/model with prosthetic legs), Zainab Salbi (an Iraqi woman sent into an arranged abusive marriage), and Bethany Hamilton (a pro surfer who lost an arm in a shark attack in her teen years).  

Other than that - there was an overwhelming amount of 'I was a nerd in junior high/high school, people called me names, I had no friends, I ate lunch alone in the library'.  Although I'm sure of the profound effect this had on these women's lives - in comparison with the other stories - it couldn't help but look whiny (in comparison with a life changing disability, in my book,  this crisis screams 'count your blessings').  

I guess this raises two questions to me - how long does the trauma of a brief childhood stint with unpopularity last?  And, more importantly - if one looks at the resumes of these participants - are dorks the ones ruling the world?!?!!

Food for thought.

Also, after reading this book, I couldn't help but want to write a letter to a younger Jaime.  However, that is obviously way too personal to ever publish on this blog.  

Bushism

George W. Bush on computers in a 2006 interview:

"....one of the things I've used on the Google is to pull up maps.  It's very interesting to see, I've forgot the name of the program (editor's note:  the name of said program:  Google Maps) but you get the satellite and you can - like, I kinda like to look at the ranch.  It reminds me of where I want to be sometimes."

George, you're not alone.  I, too, wish you were at the ranch.  

Some Things Never Change....

So, let me preface this blog post with this - some people feel I have ill-contrived views dating and relationships.  I feel everyone else has ill-contrived views and I'm right.  

A lot has changed in dating in relationships in the past, let's say, century.   Today's modern woman can approach a man and ask him out if she wants - it is totally accepted as normal.   She can sleep with whomever she wants - be it a romantic partner or casual fling.   She can live with a man without the ring if she so chooses.   Some would say she has all the freedom and control she could ask for.

However.

One thing that hasn't changed - the job of proposing marriage is still considered a man's domain.  Of all the couples I know personally (not just peers but family members, etc.) - I do not know one single couple where the man didn't ultimately pop the question (although some will argue that they, as a couple, had discussions on the matter beforehand, that it was a mutual decision, etc. - it was always ultimately the man who bought the ring and asked the question).  

Although some might argue that a woman COULD propose - I think it's safe to say that it's still considered taboo.  Whenever there's a story about a woman proposing - there's a presumption that the man wasn't ready and was pressured.  

So, that leaves me with one question - ladies, are we still living on men's schedules?  I definitely think the process of going through with getting married is, generally speaking, more important to women than to men - I think as long as a man feels secure that his woman isn't leaving him, he's pretty much content; where women are all about the process of getting married (sometimes to a ridiculous extent).  Ladies, are we better off than we were 40 years ago?  Would it be better if more women started proposing now?  Am I the only one who views this as a potential problem?  What would fix this conundrum?   

My Favorite Show on TV

My boys!  Woohoo!  Quite possibly the best show currently in new episodes on television - I'd even pick it over So You Think You Can Dance (which is an entirely different genre).  Dare I say it's fair competition for NBC's The Office?

One thing that amazes me - it's put out by TBS.  Now, don't get me wrong - in the rerun/movie department, TBS is king.  However, when it comes to its own programming - there have been some craptacular events I can't even forget no matter how hard I try (She's a Lady, The Real Gilligan's Island, and whatever that horrific show about a bizarre British woman coming to America was - produced by Courteney Cox and David Arquette - sufficed to say the Friends curse is alive and well).  

Anyhow.  The characters are very real, normal people.  Attractive yet not perfect looking.  Living very believable lives (for the most part).  Hanging out at very real Chicago locations (this is part of why I like it).  Spectacular.  

One thing that's a little unsettling to me though - the main character.  She's a female.  Single.  Living on the north side of Chicago.  Originally from the suburbs.  A writer.  Working at the Chicago Sun-Times....

What is the name of this show's creator?  Do I need to keep a better watch over my shoulder?  Once PJ starts dancing, carrying Coach bags or shopping at Express - I'm retaining legal counsel.