Reality checks for you; and checking in on reality television shows on relationships.
In the history of dating & sex, there’s been a plethora of men pretending to have written the book on getting women. They always think they are the one who “knows, and knows, and knows”. But they don’t.
Most of them are funny; but not as charming as Harold Lloyd in Girl Shy (1924).
I think when my mom and grandma let me watch General Hospital as a toddler, they meant it as a form of baby-sitting. They had no idea I’d go on to use it as my perpetual guide to life….
See on www.glamour.com
In Every Woman Has the Exact Love Life She Wants, The Lazy Housewife writes:
There are women who are in relationships that are not good for them. I’m not saying that she consciously wants to be in said bad relationship per se BUT until she makes the decision to change her circumstances, her inaction shows that she is content with the situation for now. When she wants to – truly wants to – she will find a happier situation for herself.
On one hand I agree; staying & complaining (or not complaining) is a tacit agreement that you accept the relationship as it is. But that’s not always true or that simple. For example, many people opt for counseling — and even when both parties what the relationship to improve, it isn’t an instantaneous thing.
However, what makes me bristle about this post by The Lazy Housewife is this “women who are in relationships that are not good for them” line.
I know bad relationships. Bad relationships are abusive — and when abuse is involved, the “decision to change circumstances” is at least blocked, if not out-right removed.
I’m not saying there is no release; obviously I am “free” of those relationships. (The use of air-quotes indicates that those relationships which involve children never really end — and even when there are no children, there are long-term repercussions to deal with.) I am indeed in a “happier situation”, a better relationship. But it was far from easy, far from the simple “choice to be happier.”
Attitudes & judgments like this blame us, and that blame & further victimization has much to do with why we do not have the “exact love life we want.”
[The quote, and photo, are from The Wedding Date.]
In Wedded Blisters, Neely wonders if marriage is something she even wants to enter into. With the media, as she writes, “depicting marriage as this energy-sapping, miserable way of life, where husbands have to practically beg their wives for sex and wives feel like they’re not being validated enough by their husbands” she’s not enthusiastic:
But what about this daily bombardment of television shows and movies, depicting marriage as the root of all evil? The truth is that these comedies and films play off of real life, and we know this to be the case because we laugh at their humor. We laugh because we recognize truth. People love shows like Everybody Loves Raymond because a depiction of an average guy dealing with the daily struggles of marriage is true to the way it is outside of that rectangular, silver screen. Unmarried couples may not entirely relate to the humor but they understand that this is what they’ll eventually encounter once they walk down the aisle. Are we destined for the same path as Ed and Peggy Bundy, we wonder.
So we turn off our televisions, looking elsewhere for signs of encouragement, only to be bombarded by another reality check on the state of marriage today: the nation’s divorce rate, which towers over us at all times, giving us very good reason to doubt that we will escape the odds.
The media’s reflection of our marital problems may be exaggerated ~ but as Neely points out, it’s funny because it’s true. Marriage is a tricky thing, and certainly our libidos aren’t magically put in sync just because we live together. But if I were to look at our media for answers regarding how we’ve got to this place where Ed and Peggy Bundy are more typical than representative of our greatest fears, I’d say the problem lies with the fantasy of marriage.
From early on we are fed fantasies wherein once love is found they ride off into the sunset. If the story is supposed to be saying “and they lived happily ever after,” they never show it. In film, finding one’s mate is the end of the story when in truth it should be just the beginning.
While we often are entertained by (and feed-off of) the drama of ‘the chase’ and the obstacles faced in the pursuit, we forget that ‘ever after’ is a story complete with dramas of its own. There are obstacles, chases and pursuits to be found in every marriage and I think we should thank our lucky stars for that ~ for each one is a chance to reaffirm our love and dedication.
In the romantic movies, our heroes and heroines do not crumple at the first (or even the 10th) problem presented ~ instead they keep their eye on the prize and fight for the chance at true love. Shouldn’t we view and pursue our marriages with the same ardor, passion and dedication?
Work, bills, children, household chores ~ surely none of these is as difficult as the matter of finding, competing for, and securing your mate. (And in truth, now that we are a couple we can attack these problems together; it’s you and me against the world, kid.)
He’s a morning person while she’s most definitely not, he’s stressed out at the job, she’s afraid she’s not as lovely as she once was ~ surely these will yield to the holding of hands, a quiet shared look in a crowded room, a secret slap on the bottom…
We are presented with a myriad of opportunities to sweep our partners off their feet, seduce and charm our ways into their beds, and show that obstacles mean nothing in light of our love.
We need not be complete drama lovers and go overboard creating chaos or imagining things ready to tear the marriage apart, but we can view the problems, difficulties and obstacles with more passion. We can treat each obstacle as the romantic lead does: as a chance to prove our love and win our mate.
And of course, at the end of the day we should be as eager to fall into bed.
Image via.
When making a list of qualities you are looking for in a mate, don’t overlook some of the basic fundamentals of companionship you’ve enjoyed in relationships with pets.
Forget about those jokes (and the sometimes realities) of people looking like their pets. Forget about Dominatrixes (and Cosmo articles) which tell you to treat your mate like a dog — and to train your mate before he or she trains you. Forget all that stuff and think about what you can learn about dating and relationships from your pets. After all, pets are companion animals — and that companionship thing is pretty important when it comes to dating, relationships, and selecting a mate.
Whether you have a pet now or must recall your furry friend from your past, I’m sure you’ve experienced pets who were perfect for you and those who drove you crazy. Somethings (like being woken in the middle of the night by a cold wet puppy nose — or vicious needle-like kitten teeth — on your toes) are likely not to repeat themselves with humans (at least not without special circumstances — or, if you like such things, assistance), but you can still learn a few things about relationships from Rover and Misty.
Just how much time you spend with your pet — and what you do together — can give you clues to qualities to look for in a mate. Are you and your ideal companion animal more apt to get up and start each day with a 30 minute run, or more likely to snuggle together on the sofa watching hours of classic films on TCM? Or maybe your ideal companion doesn’t snuggle so much as “is around” while you lounge on the sofa… You share the same love of relaxation but you both appreciate your space; neither of you enjoys smothering nor being smothered.
I’m a very nervous person; little, jumpy, nervous dogs who bark a lot drive me nuts. I avoided committing myself to people who would similarly drive me nuts — and looked for people who didn’t mind my energy, nerves, and yes, my barking. (In my marriage, I’m definitely the vocal little bitch — but it works for us.)
If you haven’t any pets now, you might also consider “why you haven’t” as offering some meaningful insight into your relationship readiness, needs, & expectations. If your work makes pet ownership seem unfair (traveling too much, may relocate at any moment, or otherwise cannot take on the responsibility), then perhaps you aren’t ready for the responsibilities of human companionship either — well, you’re probably not ready for a live-in relationship at least.
If you think stray hairs on your sweater or the sofa are too distressing to even consider them a fair trade for any companionship, it won’t help any if the hairs come from a human head (or a human giving head); you aren’t ready for the give and take of a relationship.
If you think of a pet as “someday” thing, think about what sort of pet you’d be most likely to get.
More often than not, “Dog People” or “Cat People” are just more annoying labels we use to dismiss people but there are things we can learn about ourselves as dog &/or cat people — if we stick to characteristics, not amusing stereotypes.
“Cat people” often prefer cats because they are more self-sufficient and less needy than dogs. So if your schedule or personality means you won’t be home everyday at 6 PM to feed, walk, and entertain a pet, then it would be best for your ideal mate to be more self-sufficient and less needy too.
“Dog people” often say they prefer dogs “because they listen” or “they aren’t as sneaky as cats” — what I think they are trying to get to is that dogs are typically more likely to come when called and willing to spend time with you than most other pets.
If you’re a self-described dog or cat person, what are your reasons — aside from allergies, there’s probably a lot you can learn about who Mr. Right will (and won’t) be.
Image Credits: Cats Rule Poster by DiscoveryPets.
If the holiday of romance has you looking backwards, remembering a love you once had, a first love, instead of celebrating a romance of today or eagerly looking for the romance of the future, I ask you to limit your indulgent trip down memory lane to just this one day…
Anything longer, anything more than a fond remembrance over a carton of ice cream (shedding of tears optional) is putting your romantic future at risk.
See, we have this tendency to remember the relationships of the past through rose-colored glasses or an emotional layer of sepia tones, glossing over the reasons why it didn’t work out. And the further away in time those relationships were, the worse it gets.
Like the cultural recalling of the “good old days,” we tend to forget that those easy-peasy, lemon-squeezey relationships of yesteryear seem so easy largely because we were younger, our problems smaller. Especially when seen with the older & wiser (and somewhat world-weary) eyes of today.
But the danger of living even remotely in past romance isn’t just that we might be missing the moments of today; it’s that we are seeking simpler times, simpler relationships, setting up unrealistic standards for the relationships of tomorrow.
So feel free to enjoy or even wallow in the romantic past for the day. A day. But don’t try to live there.
Or you won’t ever be happy where you are now.
Image via Since She Left.
In the December issue of Psychology Today (fast becoming my favorite magazine), Matthew Hutson shares unusual and revealing information about birth months and personality, saying, “Astrology may be bullocks, but your month of birth still guides your fate.”
No one is sure why birth dates affect mental traits, but environmental effects during the third trimester (weather, amount of daylight, seasonal variation in the mother’s diet) are often blamed. Here’s what you birth date might portend.
And if such things as “people born in summer are more outgoing, curious, and imaginative, and less neurotic” are true, knowing the birth date of your mate — or potential mate — might give you some clues too. Click to enlarge and read the scan.
Rumor has it that Jon (of Jon and Kate + 8) may be doing a “reality show” dating the Octomom. I heard it on some TV show or other, but Christine Navratil’s talking about it too.
What I don’t get is how they could even hope to apply the word “reality” to such a show. Everyone knows Jon’s not interested in settling down again (even the chick he professes to love can see that), let alone to a woman with kids; Jon can’t handle responsibility.
Oh, I’m sure Jon would sign the contract and do it, even have his kids participate (you remember his kids, the ones he’s saying shouldn’t be on TV now); but then it’s acting. Or whoring. Not really dating.
We women who admit we want sex must still be novelties if a national television show is putting out a casting call for us:
Women, what are the reasons that you have sex? Do you do it because it’s fun? Do you do it because you are truly in love with someone? Do you just do it just to make someone else happy or jealous? Will you have sex with someone you might not necessarily be attracted to just because you can? Do your spouses and partners understand why you want to have sex? Do you wish they could understand your needs better? We are looking for women to talk about why they want to have sex. Write in and tell us about it.
Aside from the sexploitation angle, why would this be done? You don’t see a need for TV to “document” men who want sex — that’s a given, right? But women who want sex, well, that’s downright odd. Heck, please tell us, odd woman, why do you want sex? We promise to marvel at your uniqueness! *snort*
An “Emmy Award Winning Talk Show” has placed the following casting call: I May Break-up With You…Because You’re TOO Rude!
Is it just me, or is the person who responds to this equally — if not more — rude as the person they are complaining about?
Even if the casting call insists, “Don’t write in unless both of you are willing to appear on a national TV show,” can you imagine that conversation?
“Uh, honey, we need to talk…”
Sighs as they silently think, “Oh crap!” — but replies, with a tentative, “Now what?” (Or maybe because they are in fact rude, they reply with “Crap, now what?”)
She continues, “We need to talk… On national television.”
“Whaaa?”
“About how rude you are.”
“How rude I am? How rude I am?! What the f***?! Can you even spell irony?”
Check out the October issue of Psychology Today; it’s full of great dating information (even if it’s not all listed as such). For example, the cover art & headline “What Signals Are You Sending?” which goes with a feature by Sam Gosling, entitled Mixed Signals.
In the article, Gosling discusses our personal blind spots to the perceptions that others have of us and how we overestimate not just how we are seen in terms of flattering ourselves, but we overestimate the ability others have to be aware of our internal states & feelings — we overestimate the “extent to which our behavior and and appearance are noticed and evaluated by others — a bias known as the ‘spotlight effect.'”
In many cases, our opinion of ourselves and the perception of others clash — but that’s not even necessarily the worst part; you might not even be aware of it.
You need feedback (direct & indirect) from others to know what they think of you, and sometimes the very things you need to know the most, negative perceptions, are least likely to be communicated.
If you do know how irritating or attractive you are, it’s probably via direct or indirect feedback from others. At work you might find that, despite setting everyone straight on a few issues when you last served on a committee, you haven’t been asked to serve on any since then. If the attributes are positive — such as the fact that everyone likes you or that you’re very attractive — people are more likely to come straight out and tell you about them. If they’re negative, they may forever remain unknown to you.
If you’re tempted to ignore the perceptions of others, don’t! Your body language is outside your own visual field, but others are very aware of them. And your behaviors are, if not similarly unseen by you, understood by you because you (and often only you) know your motivation & reasoning. So others do have clues for their perceptions and attitudes about you.
Even if you think other people are misguided, their perceptions of your character probably do reflect things you do habitually. Once striking set of studies recently showed that a spouse’s ratings of a person’s anxiety, anger, dominance, and solitariness are better than self-ratings at predicting heard disease. The implication: Our spouses are better judges of such traits than we are.
(I think it’s obviously worth noting the traits listed here; that spouses are better better judges of anger & dominance than the person who is angry & dominant. This refers back to the victim’s need to survive and brings up the point that those in an abused person’s support network — from friends & family to doctors, police, social workers & legal professionals — had better trust them when they say his behavior is dominant, threatening, etc.)
When people are asked how long they think their romantic relationship will last, they’re not very good at estimating the right answer. Their friends, it turns out, fare far better. But if you ask people how satisfied they are in a relationship, their ratings accurately predict how long they’ll stay together. In many cases, we have the necessarily information to understand things are they are — but our blind spots don’t allow us to take it into account.
(Yet another reason to really discuss relationships from many angles, including how happy a person is as part of a couple. Doubly important to do so alone when you fear your friend is being abused, so that they can move past the cover story and predictable prediction points of “we’ll be together forever” — which could very well be a taught or fearful response.)
This doesn’t always mean others are right, of course. Sometimes the blind spots are, again, due to the perceptions of others — based on things they observe which do not reflect what’s going on internally with you. This would seem to be especially important at work and when dating, when dealing with people who do not know you very well yet. Since their perceptions will affect how you are treated (no committees, no promotions; no dates or second dates, etc.) it’s important to see what signals you are sending.
Many of us have times when we are misunderstood. People perceive us as cold and unfriendly when we are really just feeling shy, as flirtatious when we’re just trying to be friendly, or as depressed when we’re just tired. Being misunderstood is largely a problem of a lack of information – not communicating effectively with the people around you through your words and body language.
Gosling cites work by Randall Colvin of Northeastern University which indicates that people who are easily judged, those that people just “get,” tend to be extroverted, warm, consistent, and emotionally stable. These traits, called “amplifiers,” tend to increase the expression of other traits as well as the amount of verbal & behavioral information, making them easier to read.
Another trait that makes people easier to “get,” is “blirtatiousness.” Blurters, those who tend to respond to others quickly & effusively, are open books.
Gosling says that if & when you feel misunderstood, you should say & do more. “Even introverts can train themselves to communicate more through their words — telling people directly what they like and how they feel.”
But before you run out there and babble profusely about how you feel, you should know how others perceive you. And the best way to do this is to ask for feedback. And Gosling wants you to ask more than just your mom. *wink* Seek feedback from many others, including at work and, if possible, your enemies. Gosling also recommends using “the cloak of anonymity” that is the internet; suggesting apps like Facebook’s “Honesty Box” or the “YouJustGetMe” app he collaborated in developing.
I suggest you start by considering the obvious. Are you asked to be on committees, invited to parties & events? Are you disappointed that despite all your efforts, you’re still not offered promotions & dates? If you feel you are being passed over or underestimated, then sit down with your friends for some honest talk. Maybe open a bottle of wine first; cuz once that starts flowing, so will the honesty.
The next morning, evaluate what was said and put it in context of who said it and how you perceive them… What can you learn from all of that? And how can you counteract any misperceptions with better communication?
A new video called Our Hidden Culture was put out by Community TV Network (CTVN), a non-profit organization that empowers Chicago youth with training in video and multi-media production. (CTVN’s award-winning TV show, Hard Cover: Voices and Visions of Chicago’s Youth, airs every Monday at 5:30pm and Tuesday at 12:30pm on cable channel CAN TV 19 in Chicago; you can keep up with CTVN at YouTube too.)
In this recent video project, the youth researched the issue of rape & sexual violence and came up with the conclusion that harassment is the root of such evils and that we live in a rape culture.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nv3Kz_CluTE[/youtube]
For some of us, this isn’t so much “our hidden culture” as it is a known fact we suffer & slog through daily; but I applaud these young people for looking at the issue and seeing the problem for what it is.
Many of us readily blame the issues of sexual aggression in music, movies, and “the media in general” on younger people — it’s their dollar most companies seem to seek, and so, in this toxic relationship, these companies say they are just courting our youth with “the language,” “substance,” and “style” that speaks to them at the expense of us all. But it’s clear that our youth is aware of the problem — and that those who aren’t yet aware are fully capable of getting to the root of it all when asked to look at it.
Can complete denunciation & contempt for those individuals & companies who participate in our rape culture be sure to follow? I hope so.
Have you seen these screaming headlines yet:
Is your boyfriend/husband HAIRY and you are sick of it?? Now Casting
and
Can you imagine if we saw headlines & programs dedicated to calling women ugly? If we saw casting calls announcing how husbands who were sick of their wives looks could get help — as if it were acceptable?
The media would have a field day, bringing on expert after expert to discuss female body image pressures & concerns & how this sort of valuing females for their looks was abusive. But do it about men? Oh, that’s fine.
Not.
Even if women are taught to be more (self) conscious about their appearance and so are (often) more obsessed with make-overs etc., even if these shows are aimed at a (materialistic & superficial) female audience who wants to see men transformed back to some snazzier (more romantic novel looking) version of themselves, these sorts of shows are just plain mean.
Double-standards flipped back to bite the sexist stereotypical hand that feeds them BS are not what equality & respect are about. Physical makeovers and unrealistic romantic notions are not the stuff that gets you through a healthy, longterm relationship. And dragging your mate in for a show which wants to make him less hairy because “you are sick of it” or pronounces him “ugliest” is a sure way to run your relationship off of a cliff.
If you’re really considering such a thing as being on such a TV show, just ask for a divorce, you shameless bitch. Don’t prolong the guy’s agony, don’t encourage shows like this — and don’t let me hear about it. I have rolled-up newspaper; will travel.
You know the old joke, “I must be a mushroom because people keep me in the dark and feed me BS,” right? So when I heard about ABC’s Dating In The Dark, I was suspicious. My verdict? The bad news is that the new reality dating show is unremarkable. But then again, the good news is also that it’s unremarkable.
As far as dating reality shows go — or any reality TV shows, actually — it’s rather refreshing to not watch a show and find yourself becoming pissed off at the exploitation of flesh (Dating In The Dark had the option to take peeps and bare or topless bods, and it didn’t take the usual sleazy route), irate at the mythinformation presented by “experts,” or screaming in anguish at the cruelty of manipulating people’s feelings.
OK, so some of the latter occurs, but that’s just part of dating; people put themselves out there and get rejected.
I don’t want to pick on people (even if those people have put themselves out there for such attention), but I have to say that Christina had attention-seeking bitch written all over her from the get go & so her decision not to continue to see Seth (who is a charming & attractive guy) because he wasn’t GQ cover material wasn’t at all surprising. In fact, by the time we got to her moaning in pain & hurt at the self-discovery that she was the kind or person who would dismiss a caring man who would be there for her — one she had a connection with — just because he wasn’t what the Greeks chiseled in stone, I was peeved. “Why,” I wondered, “would a person put herself on a show about proving appearances don’t matter when she so obviously (and callously) did?” Then the answer came to me: Because she’s not just a conceited bitch who thinks she’s prettier than she is — she’s an attention-seeking bitch who wants to pretend she’s nice and so puts herself on a reality television show.
But honestly, that’s about as typical (and icky) as the show gets for the genre.
There are no freaky-mean twists (like after telling the 6 participants that how they’d paired them off based on pre-show screening compatibility was a joke & tricking them into making then breaking the bonds they were making), no overly suggestive hype — in fact, most of this just proves what most confident & sane people will tell you about dating:
* Chemistry is important; but that’s not all about looks
* People have weird ways (both the down-right odd and the charming versions) of evaluating people, some of which are not suitable for happiness
* “Good looks” are in the eye of the beholder — and while we all see the same thing/people, we sure don’t “behold” the same way.
* Most people need to be directed towards potential mates because they would otherwise continue to make the same dating mistakes, write-off potential relationships for silly reasons (armpit sweat on a shirt, think a guy is too handsome (intimidating), etc.) — so trust your family & friends to set you up!
* Some people are self-centered & mean; but if you close yourself off to protect yourself from the jerks, you’ll also prevent yourself from learning more about yourself and from discovering other nice people.
All basic stuff, yes; but not unhealthy. And lately, I feel like the world, especially reality TV shows and stupid dating experts, spends too much time ignoring the basic good stuff. But still, it was confusing.
And at the rate the hour long show clipped along, I became even more confused…
With 6 contestants/participants (3 female, 3 male) and ready to see each other about 1/2 way through, I wondered how this could be a series. Were we going to keep them in this living arrangement, force them to continue dating, mate & raise children, get divorces, find new loves, all via furtive visits to the dark room?
But no, Dating In The Dark offers 6 new participants each week.
I’m not sure if I will watch more shows or not; but I won’t suggest a boycott, nor will I make faces at people who say they do watch the show.
I spotted this casting call at RealityWanted:
Looking for married couples to throw down on a nationally syndicated court show!
We give you a $500 appearance fee each, airfare, hotel & $70 each for food.
Now I ask you, what married couple is going to “throw down” (whatever that means — I hope it’s not violent!) for a grand? I mean, there’s not even the pretense of help.
All they say is that it’s for a “syndicated court show,” so is the “throw down” a divorce? Or what? …With such little information, I think it’s safe to say that whether it was your intention or not, simply suggesting you & your spouse “audition” is probably going to result in the end of your marriage.
Dear Wizard of Oz,
After hearing of your kind generosity towards straw men, lions, tin men, and stray girls & their little dogs, I was wondering if I might be granted a penis — just for a few days. And I’ll return it unused, I swear!
I just need one penis, no matter how small, to get into casting for VH1’s Tough Love 2 Men’s Panel, so that I can access & confront the Evil Witches (the show producers) & Their Flying Monkeys (Steve Ward).
If necessary, I will pour water on them.
It’s not for selfish reasons that I ask; I have to protect women, you see. And I’ll need a penis, no matter how small (a penis is a penis, after all), to get in.
So please, dear Wizard of Oz, temporarily give me a penis. I have the brains, the heart, the courage — and I know how to get back home.
Sincerely,
Alessia
Good Witch In Training, of Relationship Underarm Stick
Have you ever wondered if your mate would stray if given the chance? Do you question if you should trust he or she? Have you been dating for a short period of time and question how committed they are to the relationship? Instead of going the mature route, why not put them to the test with hidden cameras — and then broadcast it on television?
Pitman Casting is now casting men and women for a new relationship gameshow which will test your mate’s intentions with the help of hidden cameras.
Mmm, sounds exploitative and humiliating; but if you’re into that sort of a tasty bitter dish, email photos of you and your mate as well as a paragraph about your relationship to: castingmate@gmail.com
Tell ’em Alessia of Relationship Underarm Stick sent you (and sure, tell ’em I mocked it too lol).
These guys (&/or gals) aren’t “new,” but they might be about to get a new name. Grrl Scientist reports that Dr. Michael Linden, a German psychiatrist, wants to get a new diagnosable and treatable mental health disorder listed in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) — the “bible” of mental health.
Named Post-Traumatic Embitterment Disorder (PTED), Dr. Linden notes that PTED is similar to Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), where mentally healthy people are functioning fine — until a triggering event destroys their core values and shatters their basic beliefs, and folks with PTED feel wronged, humiliated and that some injustice has been done to them.
“Embitterment is a violation of basic beliefs,” Dr. Linden explains. “It causes a very severe emotional reaction. We are always coping with negative life events. It’s the reaction that varies.”
Perhaps the most dangerous thing here is the externalization. For while these people suffer from major depression, dysthymia, and anxiety disorders, these people do not feel there is anything wrong with them — at least not anything they can (or should have to fix). Again, according to Grrl Scientist:
“These people don’t have the feeling that they must change, but rather have the idea that the world should change or the oppressor should change, so they don’t ask for treatment,” Dr. Linden points out. “They are almost treatment resistant. Revenge is not a treatment.”
…Dr. Linden suggested that loving, normal individuals who suddenly snap, killing either their family or coworkers and then themselves may actually be suffering from post-traumatic embitterment syndrome.
In many ways, all of this sounds like every abusive, controlling, person I’ve ever met. Continually managing “what others do” rather than focusing on what they can do themselves — as dismissing the rest.
I would be very interested in learning more about PTED… Meanwhile, girls and boys, be very concerned if you have these people in your lives. Perhaps getting this disorder recognized will be helpful in getting these people the treatment they need — and making relationships safer in general.
Image via.
Engaged? Getting married? Want to get a free smoking-hot hair makeover for yourself, your Maid of Honor, and one of your Bride’s Maids?
44 Blue Productions is now casting for a new show called Big Tease, a special (not a series) in which the best of the best hairstylists from Style Network’s two-time Emmy nominated hit show, Split Ends, will compete for a huge money grand prize and a magazine cover.
For more information, contact 44 Blue Productions at reception@44blue.com.
It’s been days since Tough Love ended & I’ve been meaning to write a wrap-up post about the show, but honestly, I’m really sick of the Ward/Vh1 mess and don’t want to give them any more promotion to the attention-seeking hair pulling bad boys of television. The only reason I’ve continued to reply to comments (and repeat myself ad nauseum) is because the matter of societal judgment — and the many inaccuracies thereof — still matters to me.
But that issue is waaayyy bigger than this show and I think it’s time the conversation turned to look at this issue (and related issues of violence against women) from a different view point (soap box).
However, I would like to make the following, short, statements about the program.
* The show had a marvelous opportunity with the episode in which Arian’s mom was on. Not only at the “dinner party,” but in the conversation between Arian’s mom, Steve, and Steve’s mom. But while they edited the footage to include mention of Steve’s infamous statement, they did nothing to address it. Instead…
* Absurd judgmental focus was put on the “inappropriate” relationship between Arian and her mother. Now I can appreciate that not everyone is as open about things, let alone sex, with their parent; and I can accept that the Wards do not talk about sex — or at least not that way. But isn’t being as open with your parents about sex as you are with your friends (and the world on a TV show!) a really honest thing –something to be admired? You may disagree with Arian’s focus on (& attitudes towards) sex, but would you really prefer Arian pretended to be someone she’s not with her mother? I think that’s a testament to the “goodness” of their relationship. I know I talk to my parents the way I do to my friends about sex — and while I’m not as “out there” as Arian, I’m sure Ward’s mom would “upside the head me” (as she gestured, I believe) for the way I talk. They don’t seem very open about or even fond of sex. (I guess these Wards are too soft on The Beaver?) So much for accepting people & their relationships; if we’re not the Wards, we’re not “good.”
* Is it wrong of me to take a perverse sense of happiness that Ward’s “tough love” resulted in relationship failures? If so, sue me. I’d feel bad for the women involved — if A) the show weren’t a trainwreck and the women actually participated in “after the boot camp” interviews at the end of the last show… Since they didn’t, I smell something fishier than Mrs Ward’s unused taco.
* I guess there’s going to be a season two. I won’t be watching. Unless there are some major changes — and after all the people I’ve talked with, I don’t see that happening.
UDATE: For anyone willing to put themselves into the fryin’ pan of Steve Ward’s Tough Love, they are casting — men and women.
The Emmy & Peabody-award-winning company that produces Project Runway, Top Chef, and other top notch shows, Magical Elves, is currently working on and casting a new documentary series (read: reality television series) for a major television network “about marriage and people looking to get married” — specifically to find a suitor for a “handsome, tall, successful, and charismatic adventurer who is ready to settle down.”
Our chosen guy is a boat captain and dive instructor who frequents the Bahamas and absolutely loves the ocean. He is kind, funny and genuinely hoping to find his better half. Could it be you?
We’re looking for females who fit the following:
30-45 years old
physically fit / active
spiritual
liberal minded
pet friendly
Non-smoker
social
Intellectual
Outdoor / Adventurous
Must love waterParticipants with children under 18 will not be considered at this time.
You know it’s all about the ratings-matings game here, more than true love, right? If you’re into that kind of abuse you can apply here, or to Magic Elves directly. (Please tell them Alessia of Relationship Underarm Stick sent you!)
If you wonder just who applies to these sorts of things, you can vote on casting applicants here.
PS Don’t forget to enter my contest!
Ashley writes in with a personal problem stemming from the Steve Ward/Vh1 mess:
Hi Alessia,
I’ve been following along with the Steve Ward fiasco (what a piece of work that jerk is!) and I wonder what you think of the situation that I now find myself in…
While I was drafting my letters of outrage, my boyfriend of 3 years (you can call him Bob lol) came on over. Because I was feeling pretty intense about things, when he greeted me with the casual, “Whatcha doin’?” I actually answered him. I told him of Ward’s hurtful stupidity, the lack of concern on the parts of show producers etc., and my overwhelming grief to discover (via reading all the comments etc.) just how widely held & deeply rooted such irrational beliefs are in our world.
At first I thought Bob’s lack of concern over the situation was because he hadn’t seen the show and maybe he thought I twisted the words… So I sat him at the computer and ordered him to read. But when he read, he wasn’t as outraged as I had thought he would be.
Not only did he not share my opinions, but he started to argue Ward’s side!
Now, after years of dating I was shocked! I mean we’ve discussed rape and violence towards women (and children too) and he’s always seemed educated, concerned for women’s safety and nearly apologetic in that male way of like “I can’t believe there are men who would do that.” So I was flabbergasted that Bob would hold Arian or any women accountable for what a man or men do.
I want to rant on & on about this, but you’ve covered the issue really well and I know I’m preaching to the choir, so I’ll get to the problem here. ;)
After three years of dating we’ve been talking marriage. (The only reason we aren’t officially engaged is the money thing — until I get to the next level at work, I’m still not able to afford an apartment of my own which is something I insist upon doing before I marry.) But now that I see that Bob is holding onto some archaic, dangerous, misogynistic and mean victim blaming beliefs, I just don’t know…
I sent him away that day and our conversations since then have mostly been short. Anytime the elephant on the phone line is mentioned, we just end up debating at best, arguing at worst.
Bob thinks I’m over reacting; I should know after three years that he’s a good guy. But I can’t get past the fact that good guys don’t ever excuse the behavior of bad guys — let alone hold the victims responsible for what the bad guys do.
I still love him… Otherwise this wouldn’t hurt so much. But I don’t trust him the way I used to — and I’ve lost some respect for him. I think, as hard as it will be, that I need to end things with him.
Am I being overly sensitive? Am I irrational or otherwise sabotaging a good relationship for a small thing?
Biting my nails with anxiety & heartache while I await your reply,
Ashley
Dear Ashley,
I probably should say that I’m sorry my blogging has disrupted your relationship with Bob — but I can’t honestly say that.
I’m sorry to hear that Bob’s not the good guy you thought he was, but,see, from where I sit, I think you are better off for making this discovery now. Even three years of dating in is better than making this discovery after three years of marriage & building a family. That’s what dating is for, to learn all you can about one another.
I don’t think I even have anything to tell you that you don’t already know…
You know that if trust and respect for your partner diminishes you are faced with two choices: Work it out, with compromise & communication (maybe some counseling), or walk away safely.*
And there are some things we just can’t compromise on.
This situation is not purely one of political difference, like say gun control, where you might compromise by owning a gun but keeping it in a locked gun safe in the garage or something– and by knowing that each of your votes cancels-out the other’s vote.
This is far more than theory, philosophy, or ideals; this is a fundamental framework of every day living. It’s a matter of freedom, equality & safety because, as you know, even if Bob is not personally a threat to you or others, he insists upon perpetuating an environment which places women with the responsibility to control male behaviors — and when that (obviously & maddeningly ridiculously) doesn’t work, he leaves victims to suffer the guilt & blame.
Heaven forbid any violence should ever befall you or someone you love, Ashley (knocking wood!) — but given the odds… How would you cope or assist another survivor in their recovery with Bob at your side? Even if his mouth never uttered a blaming sentence, you’d see it, feel it.
Whether or not you & Bob should have children of your own, building a family between yourselves involves each of your extended families and you community of friends. Can you live with Bob passing along his views about the responsibilities women (or potential victims) have to control the behaviors of rapists and abusers to your nieces & nephews, your friends’ children?
You know Bob’s views help shape our world; and you’ve clearly said that his views help shape a world you don’t want to (continue to) live in. So you know what the math is: If Bob can’t be educated out of this, you’re better off living without him. There’s no sense in living in a toxic relationship.
This is definitely a relationship deal breaker.
In the interest of fairness to your relationship with Bob, and your heart, you owe it to yourselves to communicate this as plainly as you can to Bob.
Wherever the chips fall, I wish you well.
Alessia
* Note how when a human being has less respect for another human being, that the first human is not entitled to hurt, abuse or force the less-respected human to do whatever they want.
Fox Network, Next Entertainment in association with Warner Horizon Television, and Mike Fleiss, producer of The Bachelor, have teamed up to produce More to Love, “billed as the first “dating show for the rest of us’.” It’s promoting itself as a dating show for average folks, “Real women. Real sizes. Real love.”
“We want to send the message that you can be the size you are and still be lovable,” [Fleiss] said. “We aren’t going to thin these girls down so they can find love — that’s a backwards message.”
They are currently casting nationwide, looking for women who are curvy, beautiful, sexy, at least the age of 23 (and appear under 35) who are ready to be introduced to their soul mates — as well as America’s television viewing audience.
If you’re selected, you’ll be flown to Los Angeles to star in the show; no air date has been selected.
To apply, visit www.MoreToLoveCasting.com — or go to an open casting call at select Lane Bryant stores. Don’t forget to tell ’em Alessia of Relationship Underarm Stick sent ya!
I’ve been watching VH1’s Tough Love for the past few weeks now and, despite his somewhat slower-than-I up-take on females and a need to nurse along a viewing audience, I have agreed with Steve Ward nearly word for word — up until tonight that is.
Tonight Steve Ward began to very tactfully, once again, help Arian to see that her automatic defense mechanism, using overt hyper sexuality to turn away men before any attachments could be made (and so avoid being hurt herself), was a bad thing. True, such actions will keep her from being hurt; but they will also keep her from finding what she really wants: to be in an honest, truthful, committed, loving relationship. Where Ward went wrong was saying that if Arian continued on this path, she’d end up raped. Now the already defensive and shut-down Arian used the powerful word of rape as her cue to end the conversation. She was going to do that anyway because she is in complete denial — and wishes to remain there. But Ward was way out of line here.
Rape is not about sex. It is not borne of lust. It is not caused by the penis’ desire for pleasure, nor a biological drive to pass on DNA. Rape is an assault of rage, anger & power. The penis (&/or other objects) are used because the physical penetration and friction of intimate walls violates emotional and spiritual worlds, echoing on in the psyche, forever haunting that person (and those who love them). Whereas death is but a moment’s passing, and therefore finite.
Ward’s perpetuation of such dangerous misogynistic mythology not only places (once again) the responsibility for male behaviors squarely on the shoulders of females, leaving victims to face guilt, but by covering up the truth, leaves more women ill-prepared and therefore vulnerable to attack.
Ward should apologize. And undergo the proper education.
So should everyone behind the show at VH1.
But perhaps even more alarming than Ward’s perpetuation of this dangerous myth, was the fact that all the other women present did not correct Ward — in fact they repeated what he was saying as if it were the truth! (I at least expected my girl Jody to speak the truth!) They are as brainwashed by the rape myth as Ward.
Can you see the huge tears rolling down my face?
As for Arian & the show, she was set to run off set anyway. But it was stupid to even try to talk to a woman who is so wrapped-up in the belief-fear that her only value is her body, by talking about her bodily risks.
It’s been clear to me from the start that Arian’s projection of hyper-sexuality is based upon a fear that this is all anyone sees her as. (And some sexual abuse signals were seen by me with the first watching of the show; so watch for that reveal too.) If she is to feel valued for herself, Ward’s conversation should have focused (more accurately) on the fact that, with continued use of her defense mechanism, the danger Arian faces the continuation of a succession of one night stands — but if she express more value of herself past her sexuality, exhibits less signs of sexual availability, then she increases her odds of finding men who will view her in terms of total person-hood and not just a great lay.
So Ward f-ed up all over tonight.
You’ll notice, if you’ve seen the show, that VH1 conveniently doesn’t have a clip of Ward saying she’ll be raped — they have the clip just before that line (which, if you haven’t seen the show, is evidence of Arian’s hyper-sexuality) and the clip after it, of Arian leaving & the other women’s reactions.
No go to VH1 & demand an apology and proper education for all.
You can also contact Steve via his matchmaking service’s site: Master Matchmakers.
UPDATE See how the story unfolds:
More On Moron Steve Ward & The Rape Issue
Please take action!
Mike Mathis Productions is looking for the real life Brady Bunch: A man with at least two kids and a woman with the same about to get married. The production company wants to follow a newly blended family for (yet another) reality tv program.
You can get in touch with them via their casting department. (Don’t forget to tell ’em Alessia of Relationship Underarm Stick sent ya!)
My daddy, the one who calls ‘eunuchs’, ‘tunics’, always said that dating was equal parts learning about your date and learning about yourself.
Each & every date, each and every person you dated, was a field trip to learning. You might have thought you liked bowling but, as it turns out, you really only like drinking beer, spending time with your friends and wearing funny shoes. Go blowing with a guy you don’t like and bam! It becomes crystal clear: bowling is not fun, it’s the people you like. Then again, you might not like bowling, but you sure did enjoy spending time with that guy who took you bowling… It takes awhile to do the math, but eventually you figure it — and yourself — out. If you are wise, that is.
Too often, people spend time on dates just evaluating the other person as potential partner material, ignoring the self-evaluation. It’s important because maybe what you really really like about bowling is the flirtation with the guys in the other lane… So then it’s not the date that’s the problem (either going bowling or his seeming unlikelihood as a soul mate) but it’s that you aren’t really looking for a relationship.
I was reminded of this when I watched VH1’s Tough Love. It was the second episode but my first time watching the reality show — you might think that it would be ‘bad’ to miss the first show, but I found not knowing info about the eight women he’s trying to coach in the ‘boot camp’ far less distracting (like the whole “bitchy Taylor returns” thing — WTF?!) Anyway, professional matchmaker Steve Ward was trying to teach these girls some self-awareness. They must be pretty oblivious to themselves & their behaviors because Ward actually used a shocking device to zap the women whenever they broke dating rules — just like my uncle trained his hunting dog, or my sister’s invisible dog fence.
People reverting to old or bad habits, dating or otherwise, isn’t especially odd; new habits and behaviors take time. But the most amazing thing to me was Jody. This woman is completely unaware of the signals she sends. She comes off as a chick who doesn’t really want a relationship, but I think she’s got the same exact problem as Arian: neither one of them has the confidence in themselves to believe they’ll be loved that they’ve created tough-cookie exteriors to push (shove and kick) people away before there’s even a chance. Like those swaggering men with rotten cores I dated. It’s a neurosis as terribly isolating, self-destructive and painful as the clingy stalker chick, Jessa. And no fun for those dating them.
Stasha (who had to be zapped so often for bragging about being in Playboy that it went past comical into abrasive — I can only imagine what it would be like to sit across the table from her on a date. Ugh.) and Abiola also seem to be projecting a confidence they don’t feel… Or they could be so damn unrealistic about themselves and the realities of relationships that they’ll end up only accepting cartoon ones — superficial and, at best, two-dimensional.
(I didn’t see enough of Jacklyn, Natasha, and Taylor to get a read on them — yet)
Anyway, my point is that these ladies are all so busy looking at & evaluating men — immediately judging the men to be untrustworthy or otherwise unworthy so they can dump them and move on — that they require a third party to give them literal, physical shocks.
And even then they resist.
Along with not knowing how they behave (and how that behavior is interpreted), they don’t even seem to know themselves, their needs, or what motivates them. It’s more than classic defense mechanisms that automatically go off; it’s ignorance about themselves.
If only these women had begun dating under my dad’s dating philosophy. It may not have spared them broken hearts & bad experiences, but at least they’d have walked away knowing something more about themselves. And then they wouldn’t have had to been zapped — on national television, yet.
In Wives Legal Rights, by Richard T. Gallen, a Dell Purse Book, © 1965, marriage is defined as both an emotional relationship and a legal arrangement, “a valid contract between a man and a woman, granting certain rights to each, demanding certain responsibilities of each.” It’s taken decades for Webster’s to catch up on the definition of marriage to include same sex couples (which, as you’ll see at that link, is upsetting to co-called conservatives — selfish, intolerant bastards), and the legal definition is even worse. So it shouldn’t be surprising that other concepts are having an equally long a culture lag.
Paging through this retro Dell booklet, it’s easy to see that the gender split isn’t just regarding who is in a marriage, but what role each gender has within a marriage. Women are legally required to perform domestic chores and to care for husband and children. On the flip-side, men are required to support, protect and maintain wives and children (but nowhere is is listed that husbands are to care for their wives and/or children).
This may not seem very alarming on the surface (to me it’s a giant WTF?! moment), but the antiquated way of legally assigning roles in a personal relationship sure is government dictating personal lives. Even if marriage laws are no longer written this way, the cultural lag exists and for many, such shifts in change have not been made, making it more difficult even for those who do believe differently.
It’s easy to see where the cultural assumptions of women having the ‘home sphere’ impacts equal pay for equal work, the pink ghetto from pink collar jobs etc. Women are still not true equals in society because we are not seen as having equal footing and participation, which leads to attitudes & assumptions about women’s roles in society and individual marriages.
It’s not just the cave men (and their families) who wish to keep women in their (historical) place, but the insidious perceptions off of which people operate — sometimes unaware they hold such notions (or the unhappiness they instill) until they are tested. But once you are married, it is often too late to renegotiate what has already been seen as accepted.
My advice to you is to clearly discuss your expectations about roles in relationships with prospective mates. Be clear about what you and won’t do or tolerate — and be equally clear what you expect. Better to leave that old fashioned thinking fish in the pond, than to forever be on the hook.
Is your mom a cougar? Does she you flirt with your friends and dates — and friends’ dates? Does your uncle or the man you are dating have a “Peter Pan” complex and need to grow up? Are you an adult virgin or having difficulties with relationships because you just hate sex?
If any of these topics apply to you or someone you know — and you want to air the dirty laundry in public (and you know how I feel about that!) — Pink Sneakers Productions, the folks who bring you My Big Redneck Wedding & Brooke Knows Best, want to hear from you for a new untitled docu-series.
To be considered, email a brief description of your story, and headshots if possible, to casting@pinksneakers.net. Or call the casting department at 407.464.2080.
Remember to tell them Alessia at Relationship Underarm Stick sent you!
Just a bunch of scrambled thoughts…
Sarah Palin.
I really just want to say those words because Elizabeth Hasselbeck says that all you have to do is say’ Sarah Palin’ and you get attention — and I’m not above wanting a little attention. Especially when I can verbally hassle-back with Hasselbeck. (Elizabeth, not her husband; I’ve met him and he’s a humble man. I can’t imagine how he tolerates her normal rudeness & her pregnancy hormones seem to make her particularly snappish, popping off at the mouth as reactionary as a reptile. That’s how I picture her, with a tiny, primitive, reptilian brain.) Grrrr.
If saying ‘Sarah Palin’ gives me both attention and the chance to vent, well then, I will.
(Now that I’ve typed/said Palin’s name three — and a half — times, I’m wondering if it has the powers of saying Beetle Juice three times and something horrible will appear — like both Palin and Haselbeck.)
Anyway, idiot Hasselbeck could barely allow the question to be formed regarding Ashley Judd’s inclusion of Palin in Judd’s defense of wolves in her PSA for Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund before she had to spit out indignant rage over abortion. It all happened so fast, I was wondering if people were aborting wolf fetuses now… But no, it was just Hasselbeck being an ignoramus. As usual.
Why do those people do that? I mean, stick to the damn issue, will you? The issue was wildlife protection, not the matter of human tissue issues. I get that you are a passionate nutbag of a gal, and your hormones may be insane and all, but can you stop being a rude, interrupting, disrespectful person? Can’t you stay on topic long enough to grasp just the one issue that another brought up and discuss it?
I’m a passionate nutbag of a gal when it comes to being pro-choice, and I do.
I can also grasp the concept that people can and often do have more than one issue they are passionate about — and that often those issues may be or seem to be in conflict with one another. People are complicated like that. Including the most self-aware among us. How we each make peace with those conflicts, how we live with them, is just another slice of complicated human pie. But please, don’t mistake ‘complicated’ for ‘ignorant’ (and think you have to educate or convert us to your way of thinking). And please don’t mistake ‘complicated’ for loud noise to divert us. Your chatter, in either case, is just annoying, unnecessary noise.
And when I think of your immature & rude behaviors, Ms. Hasselbeck, I am always left wondering why you remained on The View and Rosie had to go. At least she let people speak and remained on topic.
It’s your behaviors, not your beliefs, which make me dislike and disrespect you so much, Elizabeth.
I started off saying this was just some scrambled thoughts, some venting, but — unlike Hasselbeck, I do have a point which belongs here at this blog about relationships.
Awhile ago some friends and I were talking about previous bad relationships — our “what was I thinking dating him?!” moments, and we came upon the topic of dating people who have opposing views as you do. For example, can an active Democrat and an active Republican enjoy a happy & healthy relationship? Can a pro-lifer and a pro-choicer make love, not ideological war?
I believe they/you can — if and only if — both behave with respect towards one another.
I, a firm believer in gun control, quite happily dated and was in love with an NRA man. We knew our votes and competing bumper-stickers cancelled one another’s out; even healthily joked about it to deflect people who tried to stir us up. Sure, we passionately debated the issue from time to time, as news stories and political coverage prompted the subject. But we didn’t bring up that difference whenever any other issue came up. We didn’t tag that onto every argument about dirty socks or being late. We didn’t toss it out there as a joke because it wasn’t a joke to either of us. (And that goes for issues one is passionate about and the other is lukewarm about; such joking seeks to diminish the issue, and, by association, the person with the opinion about the issue.) That sort of kitchen-sinking isn’t respectful and sinks your relationship.
We made peace with our basic philosophical differences because each of us respected, admired, and, yes, was even attracted to the other for their passion about the issue. We both dug passionate people who were neither ignorant nor apathetic in our causes & opinions. What would have happened if we had stayed together and had kids, I can’t say… A job took him to another coast and I wasn’t going that way, ya know? But I still have great affection and respect for him; he feels the same.
The point being that if you can agree to disagree in the most respectful of ways, if you both can manage to not feign respect but carry that respect forth in action everyday, then you don’t need to let the issue separate you.
Let’s face it, some issues may be too big to work past even with respectful actions. I couldn’t be marred to a pro-lifer, for example. Not just because I’m a fertile woman who could end up pregnant (quickly knocks wood), but because that subject is one that’s too strongly attached to women’s rights for me and I would end up seeing that man as my oppressor or would-be oppressor. But I’m self aware enough to know this about me — and I’m sure that’s a mutual feeling on the part of pro-lifers.
So the question for you is, are you self-aware enough to know not just what you are passionate about but also just how respectful you can be coexisting with opposing views? Do you know where your deal-breaker lines are?
Mine are really clear for me. I couldn’t deal with the lack of respect Hasselbeck (and Palin) give others; and even if they could change those behaviors, I couldn’t live with their passionate views. But I would be happier to coexist on this planet with them both if they’d just start giving other people respect.
Growing up, my dad often expressed the fact that men were always looking for sex.
When you just hung out with a boy, he’d outright ask — or at least those eyebrows would, “Did he make a move on you?”
When you laughed out loud that Steve was sooo not that kind of guy, dad said, “Oh, yes he is.”
And when you argued your case, illustrating just exactly how Steve never did make a move of any kind, even when you were literally crying on his shoulder about how some jerk guy had treated you, dad would reply, “Oh, he’s one of them tunics then.”
“Tunics” was the word he used because once, in struggling to recall the word “eunuch“, his mouth mistakenly said “tunic”. We never let him forget it either, so the word “tunic” became synonymous with “eunuch” — and you can imagine our laughter in the 70’s when fashion sported the tunic and there was much flowery talk, including of freedom, used to sell it.
Anyway, dad used the word “tunic” to describe platonic situations.
He just couldn’t understand how any man — even one who respected you — would be able to restrain himself from stealing a kiss or at least giving you one of those long romantic looks which would turn a girl’s belly to goo and let her know that romance was in the air…
Dad’s point was that everyman was looking for romance & sex — unless he was physically unable to perform it. So if Steve wanted to spend time with you, but did not make a move at all, there must have been something literally, physically preventing him from it.
It’s not that dad was a letch — he was, and remains, one helluva a romantic, intelligent and sensitive man. To him, spending time with a woman was about all a man needed to do to feel amorous — especially a single guy whose ultimate love was still waiting for him out there somewhere. Any girl could be The One — or at least a lot of fun.
He even told me about a time when my sister and I were little girls and we went to the mall with him. He spotted a pretty young woman with her own child in a stroller, and he and that woman shared a moment. Their eyes locked briefly, they each noted the other’s children and presumed marital status, then locked eyes again & smiled, as if to say that if they had met in another place and time…
Even happily married people with no intentions weren’t sexually or romantically dead; so why, dad reasoned, would an available guy do the time with an available girl if he wasn’t wanting to do the deed?
Dad was not a whistling wolf. He did not appear as a cartoon sex predator. Yet he said men were always ready and looking… It was confusing, but I had to believe him. Sometimes he was right too. But does that mean that there are no such things as platonic friendships between heterosexual men and women?
CNN recently posed the question in a recent article titled Should your wife have guy-friends? According to recent data, platonic relationships do occur:
Some 83 percent of the people surveyed think that cross-gender friendships can and do exist, according to a 2001 Match.com poll of more than 1,500 members. And a 2006 study by Canada’s Public Health Agency of nearly 10,000 Canadian children shows that they often start early, with 65 percent of boys and 60 percent of girls declaring three or more close opposite-sex friends by grade 10.
But as many of you with such opposite-sex friendships know, they aren’t always accepted — especially by your romantic partners and lovers who just don’t understand:
Jealousy over an opposite-sex friendship can be the result of projection, says Dr. Bonnie Jacobson, a New York City clinical psychologist and author of “Love Triangles: Seven Steps to Break the Secret Ties That Poison Love.”
“People project onto another person something they would do,” Jacobson says. “If Tom says to Sally, ‘I don’t want you to hang out with Harry,’ it’s very likely Tom feels he would violate that boundary [if he were in the same situation], so he imagines his wife will, too.”
I know this is true; I’ve seen it acted out. But what about the guys, like my dad, who really just don’t get it? Not because they are projecting, not because they are jealous jerks, but just because the concept is so foreign to them?
Well, keep those lines of communication open. Listen to his concerns, his point of view, but reassure him too by explaining how it works for you. Other advice from that CNN article includes the following reality checks:
• Be honest. “Never lie about the time you spend with your friend,” Sabatini says. “If you don’t feel comfortable telling your husband you’re going to hang out, then maybe he has a reason to worry.”
• Socialize as a group. “Spend time with both your significant other and your friend,” Sabatini says. “And acknowledge your love for your spouse in front of your friend.”
