New York Post Dating: A Tall Order Comes Up Short

After all of my blabbering from last week (I'm still writing that post, actually), Stephanie chose Dave. This is in spite of the fact that Dave got less than 20% of the votes overall. As a side note, next time I'll give the readers a little bit more credit, as Josh lost his lead and Aaron got 60% of the votes - as I said last week, he should have been the guy for the date. Overall, the results were sensible, and I'm no longer in trauma (for the moment). Well, that's said and done... how did these two do?

Dave says:

"I tried to make myself look smart and respectable for the date..."

Killer confidence there, dude. He continues:

"She was definitely beautiful, so my initial reaction was great."

That prose simply dances off the page, doesn't it?

"One of the first things I asked her was why she had chosen me - she said she liked what I had written in the paper. But as we talked, it turned out we had a lot in common."

Seriously, I'm going to stab myself in the eyes if there's much more of this.

"Then it turned out that we both grew up on the North Shore on Long Island..."

We are officially in the 6th level of hell. We're all sitting here reading about two kids from Lawn-Guyy-Land having a silly conversation. Jesus Christ. If they start talking about "The OC", I'm officially ending this review.

Luckily, no tawdry TV dramas are mentioned. The rest of Dave's part is unremarkable; something about Italian food, something about Bistro Musee, something about a kiss on the cheek, and something about taking it slow. Feh.

Steph says:

"There was not one silent moment and we had lots and lots to talk about, so you've got to love that."

Indeed, Steph. You're in love:

"I have to say the height difference put me off a bit. He was really tall - he must have been 6-foot-4 and I am 5-foot-2."

Date OVER! What did I tell you about 22-year-old girls? She's absolutely not into him. It keeps going:

"To be totally honest, I recently broke up with a boyfriend, and I'm not sure that I'm looking for a serious relationship at the moment." "Part of the reason I entered Meet Market was just that it's really good for me to get out and meet new people, and we definitely had a brilliant time." "...he is a really great guy - but I'm not sure if there was an attraction there."

And this additional gem: "...he looked much better in real life than he did in his picture..." Gotta love those backhanded compliments.

She claims "I would love to hang out with David and some of my friends sometime," but probably not. And the two shall never meet again.

Onto this week's daters:
Meet Ethan, who gets clobbered with the titles of "foodie" and "hungry". Works in the music industry. Looking for women with "a combination of intelligence, confidence, humility and, of course, a 'sense of humor and good looks.'" Kinda shooting high when you need to get set-up by The New York Post, eh? He looks rather impatient. More likely than not, he needs to find a perfect girl to introduce to his mommy.

Now serving:

Rachel the cat lady. Seems like she's got a couple of cats sleeping on her forehead, actually... no, wait, those are just her eyebrows, Peter Gallagher stizz. ($1 royalty check to be mailed to whatevs.org, please!) What's she looking for? "Someone who is easygoing..." BZZZT! Nope! Ethan is not easygoing! Stick a fork in her, she's done!

Adrienne, 27, goddess from the high heavens. Oh my! She loves New York City! She does the Hamptons thing! She's totally unpretentious about the Hamptons thing! I'm in love! Il mio amore! Venuto con me per caffè in Union Square! Oh, wait, sorry... this is Ethan's date, my bad. Her "worst date" answer raises no red flags - a good thing, because that's a trick question. Her best date, on the other hand, involved beers, a back yard, and 4 hours of sitting around not doing much. Can she get any better? Do we even need to read the next profile?

Kim, 31, with a nice hairdo. Cool girl. No red flags here, but I do see some incompatibilities. First, she typically dates Irish or Italian men... and Ethan could never be mistaken for either one. Second, she considers "tighty-whitey underwear" a turnoff, and Ethan looks like he wears 5 pairs at once. (Maybe a size too tight, even) For what it's worth, I'd date Kim...

...but in the end, I have to go with Adrienne. The public once again makes a sensible choice, as Adrienne is walloping the other daters with a voting lead of historic margins. I also would predict a good date between these two, with one caveat: Ethan might be a raging asshole, and if he is, we are going to hear every word about it. We can count on the Post to give us that kind of entertainment, so you know I'll be first on line at the newsstand come Sunday morning! Until next week...

New York Post Dating: When We Said We Wanted A Piece of Ass, We Didn't Mean It That Way

(reminder: links are useful only on the week of 1/16/2005)

I voted for Chris to choose Kristie last week (Chris and Kristie - yikes, bad name pairing), and so did a clear majority of the other voters. Chris agreed, and selected her for the date. The Post, always looking for fun (if, by fun, you mean "unconventional situations that end up awkward and defeating for the daters, entertaining for the trashy readers"), decided to spring for a pre-dinner play this time around - a performance of "Pieces (of Ass)". Etcetera Etcetera is the restaurant that receives some good free publicity this week as a post-performance dinner venue. Luckily, this risky date setup went hitch-free, but unfortunately this good date did not lead to a good connection.

Kristie alludes to the age issue that I mentioned last week, and it's done in a way that seems to validate my prior analysis - she comments early-on that she "had no idea how old he was", and then drops a comment that he seemed "mature". She doesn't share much more detail about him - she talks far more about the play, the restaurant, and her own emotions far more than she discusses Chris. Even as she is generally complimentary about Chris, she doesn't go for him at all. I find that disappointing; Chris, it seemed, was a really good date (better than I would have expected), has the exact right attitude about trying to continue this partnership, and deserved a better attitude from Kristie. I think it all works out in the end for Chris, though, because I think he dodged a bullet. I was left with a VERY sour impression about Kristie: the thing about the rain and the umbrella made her look like a bitch; she failed to share any substantial observations about her date, which makes her look disinterested and rude; she seemed to be very cold about the prospect of a future date, which I feel is harsh and makes little sense given the fact that she never clearly explains her thinking about him. At best, she comes off looking like a flake. Chris might have done well on this date, but I think he deserves someone with more "maturity" than Kristie the next time.

---

I'd like to tell you that this week's daters have more hope for a happy connection (or maybe a "happy ending", heh heh), but sadly it seems like it'll be worse next week.

Stephanie is young. Really young. She seems like a nice person, but there's always a higher risk when setting up a younger adult on a date - this week's date was just one example of how immaturity can easily spoil a dating connection. Stephanie is only 22, and even though she seems like a nice person, it's going to be very difficult for her (just a year out of college) to find a lasting connection with any kind of male in New York City.

Especially these guys:

32 year-old Joshua. Stephanie was learning basic arithmetic while Josh was doing keg-stands. He's a computer analyst (plus: intelligent industry; minus: antisocial industry), has a sense of wit, and wants someone with conversation skills. His emphasis suggests that he has substantial, but not unreasonable, expectations for dialogue in a potential partner. Can your average charity worker fully keep up with a computer guy, or vice versa? Did I mention he's 10 years her senior? "Outlook not so good," Mr. Magic 8 Ball.

Aaron's 24, a little more age-appropriate for Stephanie. He's a "dental student", which I won't read into too much but I'll note that he's in the ballpark of what Stephanie should be looking for. Overall, he seems confident and mentally balanced. I don't see any warning signs in his profile. (How refreshing.)

Dave, the 25 year-old firefighter, seems to be a mix of inconsistent traits. He's a firefighter, owns a motorcycle, looks like a big meaty guy, and seems to be pretty simple (in a good way). On the other hand, he likes cooking, photography, paints himself as the nicest guy ever, and tries to be positive, sensitive, and philisophical. Plus, his picture has him looking very yuppieish and metrosexual. Do you really see that guy getting off his motorcycle or running into a burning building? No. And I judge this: he IS the guy that rides the motorcycle and runs into the burning building. He is NOT a yuppie or a serious photographer, photoblogger, whatever. He's trying too hard to look like something that he probably isn't. There is a chance that I'm wrong about that, but there's just too much contrast and not enough elaboration for me to take all of this at face value. Guys like this generally do not make great partners, because they are either trying too hard or are somewhat difficult to understand. But I'll be nice, and I won't rule him out.

Without making an absolute judgement, I voted for Aaron to see what the current results are. Aaron's hanging out at the low end of the voting, Dave's slightly higher, and Josh is winning with nearly 50% of the votes. This doesn't help me, because Josh is the LAST person I'd choose here. (he does have the best looks of the group, and he is a great pick for anyone who isn't so young, but that shouldn't overrule all other factors here)

Stephanie's wish-list includes nice eyes, and she enjoys the beach and hanging out at parties. Her interests seem typical for someone her age, yet none of these guys fit that particular profile. That's why I can't get too excited about any of these potential matchups; With Stephanie being so young, it's unlikely that she'll pursue romance with someone who isn't an immediate and convincing match. I don't really see someone her age spending a lot of time to warm up to anyone romantically, even though I think she'd probably find all of them to be likeable. That's too bad, because even though there's long term potential with Aaron, he's likely to be cast immediately into the friend zone. At that age (for either of them), that's the kiss of death; I don't think they'd stay in contact long enough, or substantially enough, to leave any potential for a romantic connection to come around eventually. It's likely that they'd never see each other again if she deigns him to be a friend on the first date.

Josh is likely too old for Steph, neither one of Dave's alternating personalities is a close match for Steph's expectations, and I can't convince myself that Stephanie would find Aaron to be an instant slam-dunk winner. And I've never said this much about a weekly matchup choice without wisecracking. I must be truly stumped.

So, if we can't find a good match, let's flip it around and try to find the worst one!

I can't see Josh having a problem with being judged to be too old for Steph - he'll likely agree and they'll both walk away unfulfilled but flattered. Pairing Dave and Steph would make for a weird and uncomfortable date for Steph and a lackluster experience for Dave, even as he likely would want to see her again. (Steph: "ummm, no.") Aaron might be cast off into the friend zone, but he'll really really like Steph and his immediate rejection would be the most painful one. So I go with Aaron. Her best pick will lead to the worst results. I'm stoked!

A last look at the popular sentiment here: Josh will win the poll because he's the most widely appealing guy of the group. Most people are probably thinking that these two can connect the best - and, at a quick glance, why not? Age ain't nothin' but a number, right? Well, it doesn't work like that. A 22 year-old and a 32 year-old are often in very different phases of life, and these two are nowhere close to each other in that respect. Do you think he's going to tag along to the college bars and keg parties that she attends with her friends? Or is she going to hang out with his early 30's friends at dinner parties and what not? (I can already see her gagging on caviar and pate, like Tom Hanks in "Big") Despite that the readers think the two prettiest people naturally deserve each other, these two are going to have serious reservations about their romantic potential given the available facts. If they got over their reservations, it would still be a very weird, perhaps creepy matchup. I find it scary that half the voters would approve this match at all. These are the readers that the staffers at the Post need to keep happy. I'm not one of those people - I'm an intelligent, befuddled reader who is horrified to be surrounded by all of these insane people. The burning question: can I reason with anyone about sensible dating strategy before I go insane myself?

*shakes 8 Ball*

"Don't Count On It"

Ahhh, fuck.

The Plan: Tinker. Organize. Drink more coffee.

I'd really like to start updating this a bit more.

No, really.

I'm serious.

Stop laughing.

The main reason why I haven't updated is because I met with a sudden shortage of time over the holidays. Fair enough. This is a one man show, and nearly every successful blog I've seen was able to withstand the departure of an author - even a primary one - for a week or two.

However, I've been given some time to reflect on my goals and my progress with this blog, and I've judged my former content presentation to be redundant... tedious... and unnecessarily time consuming. Sure, I can make wisecracks about the news, but do I have to spend all day doing rolling updates to pull it off properly? Or can I just do a daily wrap-up?

There's no need to be time-sensitive and late-breaking. That's why we have Gawker, Gothamist, and Fark. They're doing what I do, they were doing it before I started, they do it with a team of professionals (and not a "team of professional"), they do it to a big established audience, and they do it better than I do. I'm barking up the wrong tree.

whatevs.org has a better idea for what I'm trying to do. One update a day, well written, with content that doesn't need a team of people. Shiiiiiit, jigga, I can do that. (It might not be "TEH FUNNY", but I could do it)

But, since I'm multidimensional, I'd want topics. Yeah, I want sports wisecracks. I'm hurting for not saying anything about Anna Benson (Kris Benson could have a 10.697 ERA and I don't think Minaya's trading him - he'll be at the team board meetings claiming "Just wait it out a little longer guys... Piazza almost got Kris to go to Scores last night, it's only a matter of time before he cracks, commits adultery, and we hit the jackpot!" And what's the waiting list like to be a Mets' batboy? Can I quit my day job for that gig? Does it have medical benefits?) I want gossip wisecracks, too - news wisecracks, politics wisecracks, dating wisecracks, entertainment wisecracks, and the occasional highly offensive joke.

And I want full power to rant on about whatever I want, as well. This is, after all, "The Lectern".

So, I have to get an organized set of topics, and I have to figure out how I'm going to attack them. Then, if I'm serious about this thing, I'll make a posting schedule, with content deadlines and a target publishing time.

I'll also chug Starbucks until I either make something happen here or I flip out and bite into my desk. Either way, it'll be entertaining!

-ed.

NY Post Dating Bonus - Not into that book

NOT 'INTO' THAT BOOK

I wholeheartedly agree, as I've said earlier. The main message here is that men must act as alpha males, or else they're no good. I disagree with that sort of thinking because it's what makes everything wrong about the dating scene - men's attitudes and demeanors run on bell curves, with most men sitting somewhere in the middle and a few residing on the extremes. If women are going to blindly listen to advice that tells them to dismiss everyone but 10% of men, then only 5% of them are going to find a decent man.

Plus, I agree with the sentiment that Behrendt is a fucking tool.

I've discovered that successful dating books - often not particularly good ones - are successful because they advise women how to find men that fit well with their own shortcomings. This is a formula for disaster. A good book would teach all people - men and women alike - how to be on their best behavior and bring a sense of confidence into their dating lives, so that ultimately dating is more satisfying for everyone involved.

(Oh, wait, it's insecurity that makes these people buy these books in the first place! We're defeating our own business strategy! Abort, abort! Go back to telling girls what's wrong with men!)

New York Post Dating: Let's ring in the New Year

As a sign that I'm coming back soon (and trust me, with the December that I've had, it's understandable that I've disappeared for a while), let's revive my favorite feature - the Dating review from the New York Post. Why is this my favorite feature? Two reasons:
1. Because it's about young people in New York making terrible mistakes due to their own narcissism, greed, and lack of morality.
2. Because we get to see these trainwrecks through the lenses of the Post, and because they're pulling the strings a bit as well - maximizing the potential for agony.

My 2005 project - getting into the Post's dating pool! It's ambitious, certainly, but if it's as bad as I say it is, then I deserve the punishment.

---

2005 started off with Heather having to choose a date among three guys:
* Eric, 27, Film and Video Editor, beta male extraordinaire
* Mike, 24, Product Designer, male model extraordinaire
* Keith, 29, Media Planner, potential "Best Week Ever" correspondent (reserved for those with a wry yet groan-inducing sense of humor)
Heather herself didn't seem like so much of a prize. She has average but cute looks; the self-description was kind of scattered and lacking in standout points. So, while she's not a bad girl, she didn't stand out as a great one, either.

I voted for Eric. 53% of the voting ended up with Eric. Those who didn't choose Eric mostly chose Keith. Heather chose Mike. As it turns out, everyone except Heather was wrong. And, after reading about the date, Heather is wrong too.

Heather's evaluation: "I chose him because his picture was cute, and his profile made him seem like a fun, interesting guy." Flashback to Mike's profile:

What three things can you not live without? Women, a paintbrush and weights.

Oooooooo-kayyy.

Heather was impressed with the flowers - good call by Mike. Heather was also impressed with the Oyster Bar, which gets some beautiful product-placement love from our starry-eyed doe. Starry-eyed is right; Heather thinks Mike looks like a movie star. Well, now that makes a lot of sense, doesn't it? Heather remembers talking a lot, but doesn't remember anything that was actually said over dinner. The date went well, despite the fact that she had low expectations:

Hey, I figured the worst-case scenario here would involve me eating a great (free) dinner, so I didn't have anything to lose.

Based on her overall impression of Mike, it seems that he didn't have to swing for the fences to make this a great date. All he had to do was... ummm, show up. And he got a 4 heart rating for that. So, Mike, just show up for a few more dates and you'll have some no-effort sex in the near future.

Mike's evaluation: His recollection of the date reveals a little bit more about the date, as well as about the people involved. Mike, to give credit where credit is due, is a gentleman and a competent person. He began the night with a charming and sincere gesture, he handled a snotty maitre d' without becoming a snot himself, he actually remembered some of the topics discussed over dinner, he has an appreciation for food, he shared dessert with his date (a smooth maneuver), he ended the date without pressure, and he's open to seeing more of her - regardless of the fact that he's unsure about her relationship prospects. (I think he's right to be wary - she seems to not have much to offer)

I don't see a relationship here. Mike can have sex with Heather if he wants to, and if he decides not to, it's over. Mike can have any girl he wants otherwise. Heather, meanwhile, might still be going on blind dates in 5 years.

I've observed that there's a stunning role-reversal here; the man gets to evaluate the woman based on personality without making appearances much of a relative factor, while the woman seems excited to be seeing someone that easily exceeds her standards for looks and charm. Based on stereotypes, it's usually the other way around. Consider it a lesson about the New York dating scene: the women must outperform and the men must do the thinking. That, and it helps a lot if you're 6'2" and good looking.

---

This week's daters:
Chris looks awfully familiar to me. Has he been here before? Anyway, other than the financial industry background (ask almost any single female in NYC about financial industry men, and you'll hear an earful about how terrible they are), Chris seems to be an alright guy. From a glance at his expectations in a woman, you can see exactly what I discussed above about women having to outperform and men having to think about their date. Obviously Chris has been around some terrible women before, so he's looking for a girl on her best behavior.

Chris gets to choose among:
Kristie the singing cat. Big, sexy eyes (and a hint of giggly humility). Metrosexuals need not apply. Perhaps a little tomboy-ish, but overall easygoing. (that is, if you'd take her word for it!)

Jessica the staunch liberal serial dater. High expectations. Wants a nice Jewish man to take home to mom. (Read that profile twice. Remember what we know about Jewish people. Think about it.) This one seems a little bit batty to me.

Heather the smart-alecky serial dater. Is that red hair? If it is, I see a bold female personality but perhaps a little bit of clingy desires to go with it. She's in her 30's and using the Post to snag dates - that's a big warning flag right there.

In the end, while none of the females have a particularly compelling profile, it seems that Kristie is the cutest and most endearing of the three. Plus, there's nothing alarming hidden in the subtext of her description, unlike the other two. She's currently leading the voting with 46%.

But I must warn - although Heather is trailing far behind in the voting, she might be the most appropriate for Chris - who, I should add, did not provide his age. Kristie is attractive, but might be just a little too young and wild for Chris even if he is attracted to that type of personality. Heather might be a bit more settled and closer to Chris's type. Frankly, I don't see long term potential in any of these dating setups, and I'm unsure if any potential blind dates will result in fireworks. Still, it's something to ponder until next week.