Love is in the air … and between the covers

It’s finally February, that month when everyone’s thoughts turn to the brutal murder and martyrdom of St. Valentine.  Um, I mean, romance. Seattle is no different, with nearly the entire February issue of Seattle Magazine devoted to the topic of love and relationships.  

And wouldn’t you know it? They’ve asked yours truly to contribute my two cents’ worth.

What do Seattle singles have to say about the dating scene? Is there one? If so, who’s out there in it and how are they going about it? Do people even use the word “dating” anymore? Or do they prefer some euphemism like “hiking the Pacific Crest Trail”? And if that’s the case, are condoms one of the 10 Essentials?

I penetrated the city and asked local singles for answers to these and other burning dating questions (as for that burning sensation, you really should see a doctor). Click here for a decade-by-decade breakdown of the Seattle singleton scene.

And in honor of today’s holiday — Groundhog’s Day – here’s another little ditty.  Ever fallen for somebody who’s crawled out of a romantic stupor, spotted a shadow of a relationship, then fled back into their hidey-hole, leaving you out in the cold?  Sorry to break it to you, but that wasn’t a guy. You were dating a groundhog.

Happy February, folks, and hope to see you between the covers (of Seattle Magazine, of course!).

Have yourself a dysfunctional little Christmas

Stress and holidays go together like overcooked turkey and dry dressing and what’s more stressful than the thought of a new love interest meeting your entire dysfunctional family?

Seriously, what do you do? Bring your new squeeze home to meet your scrapping siblings or come up with a glib excuse to keep them away? Warn them about Uncle Toby’s drinking problem ahead of time or cross your fingers and hope he doesn’t attack them under the mistletoe?  

I’ve certainly been in the unenviable and (awkward!) position of introducing a new date to the dysfunctional family fold — as have many others – and thought it might be a fun topic to explore for Match.com’s Happen Magazine.

According to psychotherapist Tina Tessina, prepping a new love interest for the family dynamic is crucial (i.e., “By the way, honey, if my brother-in-law offers to show you his stomach surgery scar, tell him no or else you won’t be able to eat dinner”). Secret signals can also come in handy, like a finger across the throat when your new girlfriend keeps encouraging Grandpa to discuss his recent teabagging escapades (political and otherwise).

Wondering how you can reconcile a new boyfriend or girlfriend with an alcoholic dad, a hoarding mom and/or a trio of sniping sisters-in-law? Then click here and read on. And as always, feel free to share your own stories of dysfunctional family gatherings (is there any other kind?).  Merry Christmas, friends and readers, and all the best to you — and your families — in 2010.  

It’s a family affair

I always feel a little goofy giving interviews to members of the media (I’m usually the one asking questions), but I got an interview request the other day that was actually pretty fun. Phillip Milano, who writes the “Dare to Ask” column for The Florida Times-Union, wanted to know if I would be his “guest expert” for the week and answer a question from a 36-year-old Jacksonville, Florida man. The guy’s predicament?

I’m 36 and just broke up after three months with a very sweet 20-year-old, Michele, who was simply too young for me. … Her mother, Linda, is 37, divorced and as sweet as her daughter. I know Linda is very attracted to me, and though I think we’d make a great couple, we haven’t said anything yet to Michele … Is it wrong for me to pursue Linda now that my relationship with Michele is over?

That’s right, he wanted to know if it was kosher to date (and do) the daughter and then turn around and date (and do) the mom. Call me old-fashioned, but I thought this was a little over the top (here’s a link to the column with my suggestions for Doug, the dating machine). Seriously, who’s next — Grandma?  Great Aunt Ethel? 

The guy’s question did get me wondering, though, as to how many people find themselves in the same situation. I’ve never been attracted to more than one member of a family at a time, but way back in high school, I had a girlfriend who dated two brothers. Of course, in her situation, she did it accidentally, i.e., she thought she was dating the same guy (they looked alike, okay, and, yes, there was some alcohol involved).

How about you? Have you ever fallen for some older guy and then found yourself making goo-goo eyes at his 20-something son? Or started dating a woman and then realized you liked her sister better? If so, what happened? Did you ignore your feelings of lust? Pursue the forbidden fruit?  Personally, it seems better to move on than risk a huge family feud, but maybe there are circumstances where it’s all worked out in the end. Whatever the case, sounds like the makings for a hell of a family reunion.  

Can men and women be ‘just friends’?

A few years ago, I went to the wedding of a good friend – a good guy friend – and somewhere between the exchange of rings and that first slice of cake realized the family and friends of the bride were giving me the stink eye. 

Why?  Apparently because I didn’t have the good sense to realize I was having an affair with the groom. News to me, of course, since we were strictly buddies (I often referred to him as the “little brother I never wanted”). But to anyone familiar with the movie When Harry Met Sally – which apparently included the entire bridal party — we weren’t friends at all, because men and women can’t be friends, the sex always gets in the way.

The old opposite sex friends thing is a long-standing dilemma and has made for many such scenes and stories. I was even interviewed about it recently by freelance writer Mark Amundsen for an article that just went live on Match.com.  And I’ve written about the topic myself for CNN.com.

Personally, I’ve always felt that you can be “just friends” with a guy and have a raft of sex-free straight friendships to prove it.  Of course, I’ve also had a handful of friendships with men where there was some kind of spark, a spark that was sometimes allowed to flare up. And other times, tamped back down (because of boyfriends, girlfriends, or because having sex with a friend is just “Ewwww,” as one source puts it). 

But it’s not always about sex.  The real issue with opposite sex friendships – or any friendship, for that matter – is intimacy. I know now that that was what was really bothering the bride and her posse all those years ago. I wasn’t in bed with the groom but I was in sync with him. There was a closeness between us and that closeness was threatening, something that finally hit home when the bride icily handed me a piece of wedding cake (I felt like she’d frosted it with her gaze). Not surprisingly, she served up an ultimatum about the friendship to her husband shortly thereafter.

So what do you think? Have you had opposite sex friendships that stayed spark-free? Or is there always something brewing in the background? And what about the other relationships that come into play – the girlfriends and boyfriends, husbands and wives, the confused family members and friends who don’t quite get it (“So you’re not dating, you’re just spending all of your time with him or her?”) Have your sex-free friendships come under fire by a romantic partner? Have you ever had to give them up?

As always, would love to hear your thoughts.  After all that talk of cake, baked goods gladly accepted, as well.

Fairy tale romance or fauxmance?

We’ve all seen the personal ads, heard the familiar phrases. Brainy blonde looking for my knight in shining armor. Investment banker in search of his queen. Prince or Princess Charming, where the hell are you?

From televised tripe like The Bachelor to essays in The New York Times (where a writer recently lamented that she “would love to experience life as a pampered princess, at least once”), you’ll find some single people clinging to dreams of royal romance as desperately as some folks hang onto their bad high-school-hair.

I’ve got a new piece out on Singularcity.com (the same folks who publish the slick, sensational Singular Magazine) that discusses the pyrite-like allure of fairy tale romance and what life was really like for kings, queens, princesses and those handsome knights in shining armor.

According to social historian Stephanie Coontz, most royal unions were nasty, brutish and short – especially on love.

“Princess Diana’s situation is typical as far as the historic tradition goes,” says Coontz, author of Marriage: A History and director of education at the Council on Contemporary Families. “Once they got the woman to give them their heir, the king or prince went back to whomever they really liked.”

Princesses were usually pampered by their sycophantic servants rather than suitors and those dashing knights weren’t exactly handsome heroes (or all that hygienic).

For the full story behind the “happily ever after” stuff we’ve been reared on all these years, click here.  Warning: reading this story may be hazardous to your Disneyesque  ideals of  romance.

Do you ever get ’scared single’?

A buddy and I went to see “Psycho” the other night at the Seattle Symphony. It was fabulous seeing the Hitchcock classic in all its gory on the big screen. Ditto for hearing Bernard Herrmann’s brilliant score being performed live.

The only problem was coming home after the movie. Alone. In the dark. In the middle of a slashing rainstorm.

Jumping out of the cab, I flew up the stairs to my apartment, locked the doors, and desperately surfed the channels looking for a mindless comedy. But it was the day before Halloween and the TV was practically squirting blood.

I finally settled on the campy 1958 science fiction thriller, The Blob (starring Steve McQueen!). But even a handful of wacky teenagers trying to defeat a monster that looked like it belonged inside a Hostess cherry pie couldn’t keep me from thinking about Norman Bates careening around a corner with a butcher knife and a bad wig. Such is the power of being “scared single.” 

It’s happened to me before, most recently when I stayed up until 3 in the morning watching some bad Ewan McGregor film about a serial killer who steals women’s eyes (click here for the Single Shot column I wrote about the whole ordeal).

I use a lot of self-talk (and a little bit of closet-checking) to get through my scared single moments. How about you?  Do you keep a baseball bat under the bed, a can of Mace in your makeup bag?  Or have you given up the ghost entirely and gotten “scared married”? 

Are you a dating ‘dick’?

You stop into your favorite watering hole after a long week at work and what should happen but you meet somebody cute. And not only are they cute, they’re seemingly single, obviously interested and there’s even a bit of a spark.

So what do you do?  Give them your card?  (That’s backfired before.)  Give them a deep wet kiss in the back of the coat closet? (Only to be surprised by “sudden spouse syndrome” three weeks down the line.) Or do you pull out your iPhone and do a quick background check while they’re in the loo so you can find out if they’re a creep or a con man or a convicted pedophile before things get out of hand.

My latest Tech story for MSNBC.com looks at DateCheck, a brand new mobile phone app that (for a fee) lets you plumb a slew of public databases to find out if Mr. or Ms. Seemingly Wonderful is married, a convicted felon or worse, a weekend clog dancer.  

Some singles love having a “private dick” in the palm of their hands; others feel this sort of access to private information — i.e., a person’s address, employer, property tax records, a record of their unpaid parking tickets — is a bit of a slippery slope. Or just plain old unethical.

What do you do think?   Would you want to get the 411 on a complete stranger (and/or have them be able to get it on you?). Or do you prefer to trust your gut when it comes to potential suitors. Discuss among yourselves. I’ll be in the coat closet awaiting your answer.

Road tripping with a trio of randy single women

I came across a post on the Seattle P-I’s The Big Blog today that gave me a start, primarily because I’d read the story somewhere before. Apparently, a trio of carefree single girls had decided to take a trip across America with “no money, no plan and a name they knew would draw attention and controversy.”

Ladies and gentlemen, I give you Hot and Retarded.

On August 28, Seattle’s own H & R member (Erica) will join her two friends, Annie and Nicole (hmmmm, where have I heard that before?) for a five-week journey from Los Angeles to the East Coast and back.

“I’ve got no kids, no relationship, no real career and I see all these people constantly say, ‘I’d wish I’d done that when I was younger,’” Erica explained in an interview with the P-I. “I never want to hear myself say that.”

Armed with little more than their cell phone cameras and a potential deal with Fox News, the trio seems open to anything – love, adventure, perhaps even jail time.

“We’ll definitely be getting into trouble along the road,” Erica told the P-I.

After digging around in the dusty recesses of my brain (and my files), I came across the original story that whispered to me when I first read about this madcap-single-gals-take-the-country-by-storm scenario. Wouldn’t you know it? It’s been done before. Like 80 years before.

Back in 1928, another titillating trio decided to set out on a cross-country journey with not much more than a bit of newspaper publicity and some chutzpah. Dubbed the Matrimonial Musketeers, the toothsome threesome was led by Helen Davis, a “pretty Washingtonian still on the sunny side of 40,” who decided to go out in search of decent single guys after she found the pickings in Washington, D.C., too slim. Helen didn’t have two single buddies to join her (most 32-year-olds were long married in that day and age), so she did the next best thing. She put an ad in the paper, garnering nearly 200 responses, out of which she chose two game dames: Stella and Vivian. The three met, discussed the trip, then set about taking care pre-travel necessities, i.e., holding press conferences and having their picture taken (did I mention you can watch a series of YouTube videos with the Hot and Retarded Erica?).

As with today’s trio, the 1928 group set off to much acclaim – their adventures were covered in New York, Iowa, Ohio, D.C., and elsewhere – and many proclamations. “En route, we are going to hold receptions and look over the candidates,” Helen told reporters of their forthcoming plans. “Wherever we stop, all lonely single people will be invited to attend the parties. They may make matches for themselves or the women may join our caravan. We expect to have several automobile loads of eligible women in our party before we reach California.”

Similarly, today’s travelers posted plans about their forthcoming adventure on their website:  “There will also be various competitions that you can compete in to party with us as we make our way to your city, along with guest appearances from people we pick up in a city and leave in another, along the way.”

As luck would have it, though, Helen and her companions never made Los Angeles. In fact, they barely made it out of D.C. before Vivian decided to jump ship, leaving Helen and Stella to charm the nation’s bachelors. And that didn’t last too long. According to newspaper accounts, the pair only made it to Nashville, Tennessee before they got into a fight about money and parted ways. Unfortunately, they didn’t part friends; Stella contacted the police who put out a description of Helen and her “husband-hunting” game.  No word was available as to whether Helen was eventually arrested or married or both (oh wait, is that the same?).

Will today’s trio of media-savvy minxes fare better than Helen and her posse? Hard to say, but I do find it fascinating how the game never changes. Just the players. And — to borrow a phrase — the level of retardation.

Editor’s note:  For a roadtrip of a different kind, here’s a link to an essay I did for the Seattle Times a while back.

Husband-hunting for “fun” and profit …

You’ve heard of the biological clock. And the doomsday clock. Now meet the “groomsday clock.”  Or rather, the groomsday bra. It’s a little tricky so bear with me.

Apparently, Japan is going through a bit of a social craze right now known as “konkatsu” (marriage hunting). According to a story in the Wall Street Journal, marriage rates in Japan have plummeted over the past 30 years with the rate of unmarried men age 30 to 34 soaring from 14% to 47% and the rate of unmarried women skyrocketing from 8% to 32%. There are lots of reasons for the increase in singlehood — women are focusing on their careers more, traditional matchmaking by “neighborhood aunties” has started to fade away – but the authors of a new bestselling book, “The Era of Marriage Hunting” (think of it as “The Rules” of Japan) feel that this is a bad thing. They encourage singles to go on the prowl, to quit sitting around and waiting for the right match to come along, to get out there and hunt that spouse down.

As a result, many unmarried women in Japan have jumped on a “marriage hunting” bandwagon. Although, according to the article, the men are a bit more reticent about the whole business, thanks to the economic slump (men, traditionally, marry when they feel like they can afford it).

Where does the weird ticking bra come in?

Well, Japanese women aren’t the only ones to embrace the “marriage hunting” mindset (and not all of them have, mind you). Businesses have also gone ga-ga for the concept, primarily as away to boost their, if you’ll pardon the expression, sagging bottom line. There are konkatsu bars, konkatsu seats at the baseball game, konkatsu prayer services (for $62 a pop) and even a popular new konkatsu TV show. Local governments have also gotten into the act, promoting konkatsu matchmaking events, perhaps in hopes of boosting the country’s low birthrate (no marriage, no babies — eek!).

And now, there’s the konkatsu bra, a lovely piece of lingerie with a clock embedded into the lace, a clock that counts down to some kind of marriage deadline. According to the WSJ article, “inserting an engagement ring into the heart-shaped ring box between the cups stops the ticking and a congratulatory wedding march begins to play.”

No pressure or anything.

So I’m curious … what happens if no one inserts a ring into this urgent piece of underwear? Does the bra explode? Administer an electric shock? And if a woman gets married to the one (or “a one” which is much more likely when it comes to this kind of weird matrimania) and it doesn’t work out, does the clock automatically rewind?  Does she somehow get back the “best years of her life”?  

Just a bit of food for thought on this lovely Independence Day. And a reminder to enjoy yours while you can. (Need a primer in the joys of living alone? Check out my Single Shot column from last Fourth of July.)

Stranger danger

Hot on the heels of a new study that suggests women aren’t that picky about mate selection after all (see “You’re so picky!” below), comes this news item about a new reality show where women are getting married without even meeting their mates.

Currently in development with Fox, “I Married a Stranger” will feature a gaggle of 30-something single women “frustrated by the dating scene” (spinster alert!) who agree to marry men they’ve never met. Who are these guys? The producers of the show will come up with a half a dozen bachelors as a starting point (dullard alert!), after which the woman’s friends and family will whittle it down to one. In other words, the husbands will be created by committee. Yippee!

Each episode of “I Married a Stranger” will feature a bride-to-be preparing for her “blind wedding” and a finale in which two groom finalists walk down the aisle. But as the show’s creators put it “only one makes it to the altar to reveal himself to his new wife.”

So, what, is the guy going to be wearing the veil?

Oddly enough, this isn’t the only reality show featuring women marrying strangers that’s in the works. CBS has also announced a new reality series called “Arranged Marriage,” in which three women marry three guys sight unseen and, you guessed it, hilarity ensues. According to the CBS website, “’Arranged Marriage’ is a series that brings the tradition of arranged marriages, which is still practiced successfully by many cultures throughout the world, to the U.S., where it is virtually an inconceivable option for most single Americans.”

I suppose I shouldn’t complain. There are tons of other traditions “practiced successfully by many cultures throughout the world” that they could have turned into a reality TV series. Stoning, for instance.

But the whole arranged marriage thing – especially when played out on national TV – just seems creepy.  What happens if they marry somebody off to a psychopath? Is that part of the entertainment? Next up on “I Married a Strangler”: Susie discovers a garotte in Brad’s underwear drawer!

Also, what kind of message does this impart to little kids? Or even big kids? I know reality TV is supposed to be light entertainment and all, but it’s hard to take all this “sanctimony of marriage” talk seriously when shows like this turn it into such a desperate disturbing farce.

Personally, I’d rather tune in to something more honest like “I Slept With a Stranger.” Or as you may know it, Sex and the City.