The Lectern

The Lectern is Dead! Long Live the Lectern!

2006-02-09T14:09:00.000-08:00

That's it, folks! I'm pulling the plug! This blog is FINISHED! The concept is stale, and the material is slowly becoming unremarkable. Although I'll still read both columns with enthusiasm (although I can't say that feeling persists through the end of my readings), I won't be doing weekly recaps anymore. I quit in frustration. Besides, I have better things to do with my week than talk about this stuff.

(of course, the original gag was that I aimed to find people who didn't have anything better to do than to obsess about these columns. And I've had many a hearty laugh both at the readers', authors', and participants' expense in the ensuing months. Heck, I even got to laugh at myself for a bit.)

Your last guaranteed full weekly recaps:

Modern Love tells the tale this week of a girl with a shifty-handed boyfriend. He hoards, he steals, he misplaces things. An occasion for a Sartre quote if I've ever seen one. Heather Fenby uses this opportunity to graduate from the Villager, where her writings seem to frequently appear (thanks, Google!). If you want to learn more about her, find her blog at http://texting.blogspot.com/. (again, thanks Google!) Fair warning, it's hardly readable due to color issues. Black text on a dark gray background? Honey, wearing all dark colors only works for clothing. Web fashion faux pas!

Note I didn't have much to say about the Modern Love essay itself. The column is slowly sinking into the quicksands of reader ennui. Right now, anyone who starts a Metropolitan Diary blog has an easier assignment than this. Personally, I'd rather start an Ethicist blog or a Manohla Dargis blog if I were to start anew. Someone's already doing a Bruni blog, Choire and Tom have the Kuczynski beat, Gawker's got Stanley and El Ocho covered, and Maureen Dowd has peaked in her literary popularity (Vegas pulled the odds on Dowd's overactive libido, so no guesses on how much longer that persists). Surely the writing and the authors' backstories in the Times are as colorful as the city itself, but Modern Love no longer fits the trend. And, besides, most of its glory moments are when it caused more controversy than entertainment - therefore making the backstory the entertainment, and the column itself meta-entertainment. (which is exactly why I saw this fit to blog about - my Technorati referrals soared after I started writing about Modern Love, and to this date they are still strong.) Now that they're not running anything that's truly fucked up, I have nothing to say about it anymore. Done. Finis. So over.

Let's beat up on our other favorite whipping-boy now: Meet Market! And, oh do they deserve a spanking this week! Lindsay was a terror of a date - how could you deem her fit for a set-up? She hovered close to Queen Worst territory - alternately skewering and praising Joshie (who performed admirably - too bad he hung himself out to dry in the recaps by being the only participant interested in romance). My oh my, what a terribly big-mouthed, classless girl we have on our hands here! Let's display:

When Joshie got to the restaurant, he walked straight up to the table and pulled me in for an all-too-close hug - I was expecting the casual "Nice to meet you" handshake.

I gave him the once over, and immediately noticed one physical "no-no" for me - too short!

I called over the waitress for a glass of wine. Joshie wanted the bottle, which told me he seemed a bit nervous.

He told me about... his love for his favorite food - "meat and potatoes." I'm your typical sushi kind of girl so we hit a sour note with ordering. He wanted the Vertigo burger, which I have heard rave reviews about, but nevertheless, I haven't eaten red meat in five years!

He suggested that we order a lot of different dishes, but sadly followed that with "Well, we're not paying the bill!" That wasn't very romantic.

As he talked about his former partners, I made a mental note of three of Joshie's attributes - good hair (no baldness), good jokes (no pity laughs) and, reassuringly, he smelled like he took the time to take a decent shower.

Lastly, and possibly most importantly, I need to be able to wear heels with any guy I date without feeling like he should be wearing a leash.

Rarely does someone bury themselves this completely in a matchmaking column. All of her rejection criteria focus on superficial needs; she has little restraint from embarassing a gracious date in a widely-read newspaper column; and the girl is obviously spoiled. Perhaps she's the one who should be on a leash.

(Just because I'm bored with writing this blog doesn't mean I've lost my mean streak. Not one bit.)

Next week's date is Becky, a mid-20's art-production coordinator. She admits that she's a dork. Lucky for her, she's got a bunch of dorky-looking guys to choose from. Carlos looks like her best match; he's cool, sophisticated, motivated, confident, and smart. Perhaps she can turn on some of his Latino heat. The other two guys really just cannot compete; Glenn's a bit on the young side to be dating a girl around Becky's range, and Greg needs to grow a set of balls (and lose the earring, Captain Lou Albano).

I'll be reading what happens next week, but someone else will have to blog about it. I won't be! Guest authors are more than welcome if they're sufficiently motivated; email me at my Gmail account (user brianvan, natch) with your submission and I'll post it here. Otherwise, signing off!

-bv

Week of 01/29/06 - Only The Air Is Warm

2006-02-02T07:04:00.000-08:00

Quick reviews:

Modern Love does its Readers' Digest impersonation again, selecting a beautiful essay about families, life, and death that fails to provide any real insight into contemporary trends. The essay would have worked better for the "Lives" column in the magazine (and I do insist that this column tends to pickup the "runoff" from that column at times). Anne Marie Feld's work is definitely a recommended read, but my only issue with it is that it's unfocused by way of severe editing - it looks like this might have been a book cut down to two pages. Oh, wait, look at the end... it is a book! (*rolls eyes*)

In Meet Market, Sonia chose Rob, they indeed were two nice (if not quite young and goregeous) people on their date, and nothing quite happened there. I would continue to blame the winter blues, but you know what? It's been 55 degrees outside. No excuse! You Meet Market authors better step things up... you've totally lost your edge. Don't make me start buying the Daily News!

This week's chooser is Lindsay's breasts. Lindsay herself is a very young girl with very high expectations... boys, now's the time to make that pumpkin a carriage if you can at all manage (in other words, don't be taking the subway on your date - spring for the town car). But attached to Lindsay are big, round, beautiful breasts. Simply stunning. I looked at that picture 5 or 6 times and I still don't remember Lindsay's hair color.

Who's got a shot at winning this week? Murty is an outside chance - or, more like a match made in hell. Both would be miserable on a date, I assure you. Next is Joshie - Joshie! Wow, his common name is cutesy! That's gotta get laughs down at the DMV! Anyway, he looks like Elvis (more than he looks like Patrick Dempsey, as his profile would suggest) and he might make the grade for Lindsay's breasts... if he has money, that is. (Which I think he does not.) Finally we have just plain Josh, who looks somewhat acceptable for the purpose of taking Lindsay's breasts out on a date. I would tentatively choose Joshie over Josh, but that's no dig against Josh, and I admit the pick could go either way. That said, with all the participants being so young and possibly misguided (I'm biting my tongue here a bit... I think some of these participants are clearly unsuitable to date anybody), there's only a very slim chance of lasting romance. Enjoy the free meal on Rupert's tab, though!

Week of 1/23/2006: Old People Are Scary

2006-01-27T08:43:00.000-08:00

Modern Love goes creepy this week: Abby Sher relates a tale of how she nearly seduced a gentlemanly older professor, and herself too - until she snapped out of it and realized that she just wanted to be around her dad. And Old Wrinkly Professor Guy is not dad. An admirable performace by Andrew while dealing with a mentally-crippling case of blue balls. And another lesson to not trust any girls under 25.

Verdict: It's good. Nice, sharp material.

Meet Market doesn't fare as well this week. To start, Michael ignored my advice and went for saucy Beth. Result: two people trying to find flattering things to say about each other while silently bemoaning the lack of chemistry on the date. It's like giving a eulogy for a mean aunt: "Well, ummm, she smelled nice. And she, uhhh, liked cats..."

Eulogy is correct here; there won't be another date. Will there be romance this week, though? Hard to say... I'm not getting any feelings of longing while seeing this week's daters! We've got a bunch of older double-baggers trying to find romance without vomiting. I say it's not possible.

Sonia picks. She's luscious. I beg to differ: chocolate cake might be luscious, but just because you eat a lot of it doesn't make YOU luscious.

When she's not working, she loves to "cook, sleep, read, listen to music, work out, take long walks and explore."

Explains the shoulders-up headshot, eh? Luckily none of the guys on this week's slate are athletic, either. Rob's about the only decent one overall. Not naming names, but I think being a pervert and having a second chin the size of Michael Moore would both be disqualifying factors for picture-dating, no matter how nice the people are.

Let's make this clear: save for one guy who looks a little sharky, they all seem rather nice. But that and $2 will get you a subway ride in this town.

My hasty pick is Rob. After having a minute to look over the choices, I decided quickly and then burned the newspaper to prevent these faces from haunting me. Think happy, happy thoughts... happy thoughts... pictures of Naomi Watts to cleanse the palette... ahhh, that's better.

Week of 01/15/2006: Two Things Are Certain In Life - Death and Neuroses

2006-01-17T12:11:00.000-08:00

Modern Love has another Readers' Digest week. No one in the story is below 50 years old. (*snooze*) It's not that Caroline Miller's tale isn't a good one; it's just that there's more contemporary narrative in US Weekly than there is in these sort of essays. (50-year-husband had a life on the side. I've never heard of this happening before, ever. Really.)

The Post's Intimidate is a little better, though. Wilson's a tall, dorky, father psychology professor, so who better to pick for him but a self-admitted mental health case - like, say, Virginia?

We made nervous conversation at first, but when he told me he was a psychology professor, with a therapy practice on the side, I was fascinated. I've logged a few years on the couch myself, so I always want to hear what it's like from the chair. I asked questions and got him to tell me about transference and countertransference!

Transference and countertransference? Too lazy to Google today. Just wear a condom, kids. Keep it safe.

Yes, Virginia and Wilson hit it off nicely. Despite my poking fun, they both behaved respectably and got along memorably. Another win for Meet Market! Maybe Tom's dream of a Meet Market marriage may come true someday after all...

This week's daters? Michael's a "self-proclaimed agent provocateur." Bad news! I can assure you that an antagonist never gets past the first date. Will he behave? Also, he's looking for a smart girl... that request is really not hard to fill, but based on his hipster-ish preferences, I'm going to say that he wants someone who looks the part, rather than someone who's brilliant and fearsome. He needs a nice girl with thick-rimmed glasses.

Kara's the only one who fits the bill - out of all three girls, Kara really looks like the stereotypical hipster. Except, she's nice! Which is not to say anything bad about Beth (red mesh thong? I'm hot for teacher...) or Lauren ("sex kitten" + "the perfect first date" = extra horny), because they're both very nice as well. However, I can see things going nowhere with Michael and those other girls because they seem sexually and romantically aggressive, and that WILL scare him off. Kara, on the other hand, will be the innocent and low-stress girlfriend that Michael's looking for.

(Beth's thong is going a long way with the polls, though - she's crushing the other two with a ridiculous 50+ point lead. Perverts! But yeah, Beth is super-sexy. I'd like to be in her homeroom class, if you know what I mean.)

Week of 01/08/2006 - Dating Wrap-Ups

2006-01-13T14:02:00.000-08:00

First, in Modern Love... three earth-shattering developments:

1. The author isn't selfish!
2. The author isn't trying to sell a book!
3. The essay's pretty funny!

Sure, we've seen these things happen before, but I'm not sure if all at the same time! Lainie Keslin Ettinger's piece is about... well, you could say that it's about a housewife that likes cheesy romantic movies and uses them to get excited enough for sex with her husband. I say, it's about movie theater masturbation. Hey, there's nothing like pressing your own button in a dark public place for a little excitement, right? Just don't let anything funky get near my popcorn, lady!

Meanwhile, over at Page Three-Thousand-Two-Hundred-Seventy-Eight, Josh found a Gillette Mach 3 and put it to good use on the scraggly beard... alas, an improvement in grooming did not lead to romance! Lilian was flattered, but ultimately unimpressed. The restaurant was Pair of 8's, but the ratings were a pair of 2's. Oh, well! Sucks to be Josh! (Lilian, that offer still stands, you know...)

MEET Wilson, a wry and witty 41-year-old psychology professor.

And the picture looks more like a 22-year-old gas station attendant! Young looking guys just don't score... I mean, I should know, I'm reduced to hitting on girls appearing in the newspaper from my blog... so I hope he's got the personality to make up for it:

(in response to the three things question: "I'm not sure what caffeine does, biochemically that is, but I'm pretty sure without it my head would implode. ChapStick is another thing; I can seriously jones for ChapStick. Finally, sunshine. For me, sunshine is like gasoline, except it's neither liquid nor flammable. And it's not a fossil fuel."

Forget sunshine. I'd rather pour gasoline on myself instead, having just read that profile. Painful!

But not as painful as being a 26-year-old blogger having to make non-tasteless comments about women above the age of 40... which is what I must do now! And you know what? I'm abstaining. I'm just going to pick a winner, and tell you why.

It's obviously Rachel. First, she's in MENSA, so she'll appreciate those brainy psychology professor jokes that Wilson has waiting by the truckload. Second, she's the only woman who didn't specify "tall" in the requirements, and that right there is a major red-flag. (Leslie asked for: "A Bill O'Reilly type - tall and conservative." Ummm, practically the only person in the state of New York who meets that definition IS Bill O'Reilly!) All the other factors don't matter, because they're both smart and they're likely to be disgusted with one another - but at least it won't be as disastrious as a date with "Looking for a fuck buddy" Virginia and "Looking for Bill O'Reilly" Leslie.

Sorry for the lateness this week, will catch you here soon!

5Habits - yeah, I'll play along.

2006-01-13T01:04:00.000-08:00

Not that I haven't been involved with enough blog-related bullshit over the past week... now the inimitable Angelina tags my ass and forces me to play in some silly blog game. Well, I'll have a go at it.

The rules are as follows:

The first player of the game starts with the topic, "5 weird habits about yourself".And people who get tagged need to write an entry about their five weird habits, as well as state this rule clearly. In the end you need to choose the next 5 people to be tagged, and link to their web-journals. Don't forget to leave a comment in their blog/journal that says "you have been tagged" and tell them to read yours.

Bah. I have to do this here because among all my other blogs, this is the one with enough piss on it to make it worthless. Besides, Angelina tagged me at The Lectern. If you want to read a REAL blog, go here.

Onto the list:

1. I antagonize bloggers for fun. Not just any bloggers, but the biggest ones. Sometimes in-person.

2. I'm always wearing socks. I have nothing to hide, but it'll be a cold day in hell before you see me barefoot.

3. I eat my pancakes in a VERY particular manner. I cut them into a 4x4 grid and eat from the outside in. It's geometrically orderly and obsessive. I'm pretty sure that if you tried to force me to eat them differently, I would fucking kill you.

4. When I ride the subway alone, I have an intense need to peer out the windows into the surrounding tunnels and explore.

5. Conversely, when I ride the subway with others, I have an intense need to tell people about EVERY INCH of the system as if they cared where all the abandoned tunnels were. Well, I do care, motherfuckers! Deal with it!

People are gonna hate my ass for this. Faile, Whitney, Alli, Eefers, and Rudezilla. Seriously, these are the 5 people who would hate me the least for throwing this in their direction.

Week of 01/01/2006 - Dating Wrapups

2006-01-04T13:18:00.000-08:00

Modern Love this week:

"...more than a quarter-century ago I wrote an Op-Ed article for The New York Times on the satisfaction of being a full-time housewife in the new age of the liberated woman. ... The column morphed into a book titled "Ever Since Adam and Eve," followed by a national tour..."

Christ, how low can we go here? Now we're using Modern Love to pitch books that have been out for years! And what about the idea that the NYTimes is putting their former columnists back up on the pulpit, in some roundabout self-promo scheme? Oi.

Anyway... the title of the essay is Paradise Lost (Domestic Division), which means you should expect a humdinger of a tale about someone's life being sheared apart. Simply put, the author was abandoned by her husband of 40 years, and she had to struggle in the aftermath. It was an experience filled with irony because of the book she had written years earlier expounding the virtues of domestic servitude, which is the interesting twist. The insufferable part, though, is that Ms. Hekker is so bitter with her experiences that she cannot find the good in her prior work. Instead, we're treated to a glorious bitchfest that dedicates only 6-7 sentences to the happy ending, as if it weren't so happy after all. She is obsessed with the misery of her bastard husband leaving her, and she speaks very little of what her family and her community did to help her through her trying times and lead her to independence. She does us all a disservice. She should turn that frown... upside down!

In Meet Market, things have a little more zip this week. Jennifer chose Aaron, and both found great chemistry on their little blind date. Jennifer's not as enthusiastic about the future as Aaron seems, and the writeups from both participants were very, very bland, but I'm thinking these two have a chance at future romance. A win for the Meet Market authors! (who, on my last check, now count more than just Laura and Tom, and it's just too much for me to keep track anymore.)

Next week, we have Josh choosing among three lovely ladies... ummm, seriously, where did they get this guy from? Did they just find someone living in a cabin in the woods or something? Scraggly beard, scruffy hair, puffy eyes, plaid shirt... is it safe to say that this guy is probably not from Manhattan? And here's the best part... he's a "financial analyst". There's no joke in the world that can properly illustrate the contrast between that statement and his picture. Well, maybe it's a bad picture? Maybe he's the only financial analyst on Wall St. with a beard? (and who does "stand-up comedy" on the side, too)

Our ladies? All recycled. Deepa, once again, looks vaguely boring and perhaps a bit scary. (I love it when women joke about drama and bad dates so that people can relate to them... and, instead, they look like they're one bad breakup away from boiling someone's pet rabbit. Comedy!) Lilian, once again, isn't going to put up but might put out. Denise, on the other hand, may have had her profile changed a bit from the last time; in any case, she does not come off as unattractive but she fails to be a convincing date. Naturally, Lilian is my choice here.

Next week, Lilian finds that her date is also in finance... and suddenly finds herself at some West Village bistro with the Man in the Mountains. Should be fun!

December Dating Wrapup

2005-12-28T07:46:00.000-08:00

You, the reader, should know several things after reading this blog:
1. "Modern Love" often tries to be fresh and thoughtful, but typically leaves a bad aftertaste.
2. "Meet Market" tries to be sincere and endearing, but typically arrives as comical and embarassing.
3. Brian Van tries to be consistent, but typically doesn't update much in the month of December.

Let's try to catch up a bit. First, in the Times:

- 12/11: Lisa Baker shares an essay about her experience being a surrogate mother. It was an acceptable entry, if you don't mind the "Reader's Digest" type of Modern Love essay. Oh, and would you have guessed that Lisa's writing a book about her experience as well? That trend is getting a bit annoying.
- 12/18: Debora Spar writes about adopting a foreign child. This essay isn't a precursor to a book, but of course she's writing some kind of book (as it's mentioned at the end). This one strikes me as somewhat odd; this woman becomes obsessed with foreign orphans online (no, not these foreign orphans) and decides to cherry-pick one for herself. The essay ends on a somewhat awful note, as Debora finds herself again browsing orphans occasionally - as if she's not satisfied with what she's got. Bah. Also, she's a professor at Harvard - so if, like myself, you smelled a whiff of "overpriviledged upper-middle-class family gets to help save the world one self-absorbed task at a time", you were correct.
- 12/25: Merry Christmas! You get the heartwarming tale of Ellen Pall and her father's descent into dementia. How cheery! Oh, and this is part of Ellen's "series of essays on loss and redemption." Which means that at some point in the future, there will be something you should buy! I'm not going to be unfair to the essay itself - it was rather good - but this makes for three Readers' Digest essays in a row.

Aside from the schmaltz and woe, I also have a problem with these essays being rather unspecific about the setting while being published in a New-York-City-based newspaper. What happened to all the romance stories? Do people not find love in Manhattan or Brooklyn anymore? Heck, I'd settle for something from the Bronx at this point! Perhaps "Bullets Over My Baby", or "I Left My Heart In Mott Haven."

Onto Meet Market:

* Jackson had went with Jocy - great choice! - and the two hit it off fabulously. Jackson, it seems, has great taste in nightlife and also knows how to dance. In the end, he had no problem charming Jocy and showing her a great time. She definitely wants to see him again (and vice versa), so we have our first successful date in a while! Nice!

* The following week, Rose chose the seemingly charming Jim. And here's where I mail it in and skip a date review, because I can't get to the archived version. Whoops! I seem to remember that both daters were well-behaved and the date executed nicely, except I think Rose was just going to move on anyway. I wish the both of them luck in the future. And you can check out Jim's blog for entertainment purposes if you'd like...

* This week, Andrew went with Leora for a date at Paris Match (the place where I had my own Meet Market date... not a bad venue). Andrew starts with, "I could tell right away that she was a very decent person" - which I find is the least romantic way to describe a date! Does this get better or worse?

Leora: The problem is that most of the guys you meet are very nice but you just don't click. And that's what happened here. We had a nice evening. We got the check about 11 p.m. and both headed home - alone.

Oooh, tough break Andrew! I know you thought Leora was a hottie, but she just wasn't feeling it with you! Sad, sad. Again, winter dates suck.

For next week, I'm not too hopeful. Jennifer starts with:

she is looking for "a man that is 6 feet tall and above" ...

*grunt!* *snort!* Aside from the fact that I'm not 6 feet tall myself (one reason to take umbrage to such comments), I should add that a very small portion of the population is really that tall. Most men fall somewhere in the middle, as the bell curve would dictate. So, that said, I can't have any hope that she'll bond with any of these guys if she really sticks to that demand. Also, how tall is she? I mean, if she's 6 foot herself, I'd understand that preference... but why do I get the feeling she's one of those 4'10" midgets who make crazy declarations like that? Puh-leeze. If you think you're too good to date in your own height range, you shouldn't be dating at all.

The guys? Mitchell's been here before, and I'm going to reject him again. A bald artist with a middling profile - I don't think Jen's going to go for him. (You're a nice guy, Mitch; tune up your profile and keep hitting the scene) Michael is a handsome and brainy guy, but we don't know anything more about him from his printed profile. Aaron is back for another go-round, and he's a good guy (also probably tall enough for Jen), but is he appropriate for our date picker?

I'll go with Aaron, because his profile is a lot more effective than Mike's. Much of the voting is going to Mike, entirely because he's a pretty boy. But we already know that's how things work with Meet Market.

Happy New Year to all! I'll see you next week...

New York Post Meet Market: The Long Winter Is Not Nearly Over

2005-12-04T15:05:00.000-08:00

My money's on a cold date with Katie and Gene next week. Speaking of cold dates, notice how things always get worse for Meet Market over the fall and winter seasons?

Truer words have never been spoken. Katie picked Gene and all but completely demeaned him on their sham date. Also, the cold snap lengthens. Laura, Tom - what the fuck? We know you can do better than this. Shit, I did better than this! And I suck at this dating thing! Surely if I can find love (errmm, to be more specific, an occasional acquaintance who I talked to all of three times after the date, but that's besides the point!), and if Celine Dion and Ian can find love, then I know you can make it work for others too!

The date between Katie and Gene is worth breaking down a bit, as there are some lessons to be learned. For one, don't miss your first date, cause that's the sort of thing Tom puts in the lede!

THIS week's date - Katie, a law student, picked Gene, a financial marketing whiz - didn't get off to a smooth start when Katie failed to show up at Butai...

Shit. This doesn't look good from here.

Gene: Katie was there when I arrived - I was probably about five minutes late, and we had a brief hello kiss. This was where the trouble started, as we both mis-timed the kiss and it all got quite awkward and embarrassing from the get-go.

Gene - although I'll excuse you from blame from this point forward, I have to say that you're a fucking klutz. Sorry. This is something you need to get right in the future. Continuing:

Gene: Unfortunately, the conversation did not go well. I felt like we spent a lot of time just feeling our way through the basics. But quite a lot of the subjects I tried to talk about turned into nothing, so that was tough.

Quick explanation: Gene, you're a working professional, she's a college student. Unless you've got your pants down and she's got the "fuck me" look on her face, you will have nothing in common. Nothing at all. And, truth be told, even if you did have some mundane common interest (mountain climbing, capoeira, cupcakes, Neil Diamond, etc.), all that counts in the end is the "fuck me" face. If you cannot ignite the flames of desire in the intended target, you are accomplishing nothing but meaningless smalltalk. That is how animal chemistry works. But hey, good luck with the smalltalk!

Now, for the juice:

Katie: Gene was quite amiable, but he wasn't really forthcoming about himself. It became obvious fairly early on that he wasn't interested in me, so I decided to simply enjoy the gratis food and drinks.

Huh?

After the meal, we left the restaurant together and walked to the subway. Once were got to Union Square, though, he insisted that he had to go to a different station, despite the fact that he was taking the 4 train and I was taking the N. At that point, I decided to go back to Butai and give the bartender, who I had been talking to earlier, my number. He was, after all, much more engaging than Gene.

Aaack! Horrible etiquette, through and through! So, guess what?

That's right, Katie is our new Queen Worst Dater Ever! Come on, you just don't pull shit like that unless there's some real justification for it. And, unless there's some new proof otherwise (and you know that's happened before), I have to say that there was no justification to carry things out this way - especially after you blew off the first date, Katie! Meanwhile, I've got a tip for the bartender...

(yeah, you know where that's going. I think my point has been made.)

Onto next week's frigid mess...

MEET Jackson, an extremety cute 24-year-old emergency-medicine research assistant.

Ummm, I beg to differ. He looks like a cartoon sheep dog to me. Unless maybe Laura took a liking to him, eh? Heh heh.

(UPDATE!!! Since the karma gods had seen that Jackson's dating profile was just a bit on the harsh side, I was given the fortune of stumbling upon a common acquaintance's Flickr account to find today's article mentioned. Apparently, lovely Jen Carlson of Daily Refill and Gothamist fame knows Jackson, and snapped a pic of today's NY Post Meet Market article for her photostream. This tipped me off to search for more photos of him in her photostream, and indeed there are more. So, in the interests of being completely fair, here's what Jackson looks like in a better photo. I'll give him handsome credit where credit's due. If you are not already completely bored of photostream-fucking, here are more photos of Mr. Jackson Hotsuff. Readers, make note that your dating picture can make or break you. Now, back to our regularly scheduled crapfest.)

Well, Laura, if you think he's cute, he'll still be on the market for a few more weeks... cause he ain't getting anywhere in Meet Market. For one thing, his profile is a mess. Moz heads and Dead heads? Tar Heels? Unprovoked swipes at L.A. and Westchester? Uh-nuh. Needs a lot of work. And another thing, this week's dating pool is a bit messy. Let's take a look:

Deepa, how would you describe yourself? I like elbowing old ladies who, even though they have been sitting for 22 hours, feel the need to push you to get off the airplane the minute it has stopped taxiing to disembark three minutes sooner. Why they can't wait three more minutes, I'll never know. If I elbowed your grandma, she deserved it.

She's joking, of course. Ummm, am I right? Well, that's half of her profile right there. Wasted on a poor joke. Hey Deepa, is this thing on? (*tap-tap!*)

Next, Lilian, a mid-twenties finance manager. A quotable:

What do you find sexy? I'd really like to meet someone that doesn't beat around the bush and gets to the point.

Hot damn! Lilian, stop by the Patriot Saloon sometime and find me! As illustrated by my prior talk of "fuck me" faces, I'm sure I'm the type of get-to-the-point guy you've been looking for! Forget Jackson the Shaggy Dog, he's not your type at all. He just wants to sit home and scarf chow mein between bong hits with his male-nurse buddies. You know what you need to do. Oh, and Lilian, you're definitely a cutie...

Finally, we have Jocy, a mid-twenties program assistant. Non-existent job, but we can look past that for the right young lady. More quotables:

What do you like doing when you're not working? Eating, drinking, dancing on bars and juggling kittens.

Oooh, a feisty one!

What's sexy to you? What do you look for in a man? It's sexy when a man is confident and secure in himself. I have to say, nice big hands are sexy, too.

(you know what they say about guys with big hands...)

What has your romantic experience been like? It has definitely been intense, and I'm looking for something light and fun.

Light and fun, eh? Sounds like my type of arrangement! Plus, Jocy's got the hot look going in the picture - hair blowing back, beautiful face, a fantastic neckline... everything we see is hot! Hey, Jocy - ummm, why don't you come to the Patriot on some other night than Lilian and we'll talk, okay? I'll even forget that you said this:

If we were to ask your best friend about what kind of man they would like to see you with, what would they say? She would probably say someone who is an American - for once.

Well, I'd probably benefit from that preference, as I've not spent more than 26 days out of 26 years outside of the U.S., but... that's so racist! Yikes! You shouldn't say things like that, especially in a blue state like New York! Not only is it really uncool, but liberals have crucified people upside down for less-misguided statements! That said, I sit on the center line, and I'll give Jocy the benefit of the doubt and say that she's just making a snippy comment because she's had a less-than-successful string of dates with guys looking for a green card. Hey, sometimes it works out with the foreign men, you know! (shout-out to Carolyn and the Vinkster! Woo woo!)

Okay, so Jackson the Shaggy Dog isn't really compatible with any of these girls. Two are potential man-eaters and the other didn't mention anything about the Grateful Dead. That said, although Deepa didn't indicate any love for long guitar jam-sessions, she is a bit of a jokester... so, considering that one likes laughs and the other might like smoking weed, we could have a match! Plus, Deepa's kinda cute, and that goes along with Jackson pretty well if you'll believe the Meet Market authors. And, although I personally give Deepa an "A" for effort with her profile and wouldn't mind spending a blind date with her, I've got way too much on my hands already with Lilian and Jocy (aka "Tuesday" and "Thursday" *hint-hint*). I choose Deepa for Jackson. Most of the crowd early in the week voted for Jocy, but it's hard not to vote for sexy Jocy and her entrancing flowing hair. And that validates everything I've said in this column.

Until next week, folks. (You know, if I decide to publish anything. You've seen what it's been like around here lately!)

New York Times Modern Love: Keeping Love In The Family (In A Manner Of Speaking)

2005-12-04T14:39:00.000-08:00

This week's Modern Love contribution by Linda Baker makes me re-evaluate why I read this column at all. Shall I ask, "Where do I begin?" How about, "Let's end this quickly" instead.

Linda - keep in mind, this is a TRUE story - is close to her children. Actually, a little too close. WAY too close. Second paragraph:

...the thing is, I'm canoodling too, with my gangly, 65-pound, 10-year-old son.

Canoodling? Don't we see that word in another New York-based column way too often? Except when they use it, it means "kissing passionately". Ewwwwww!

Linda doesn't mean it that way, but she is admitting that she's excessively touchy-feely with her too-old-for-this-shit kids. And the excessive PDA is unsettling to her, even though she encourages it.

But wait a second... what about the readers? Once again, the universe is centered on the author of a Modern Love column such that the need to share his/her own needs and emotions trumps the good of the public. Which applies here thus: if she thinks SHE'S uncomfortable with the PDA, she obviously thinks not of the millions of sickened Times subscribers who had to bear this essay. They are all far more disgusted and unsettled than Ms. Baker, I assure you.

The essay proceeds under a plot umbrella of Ms. Baker's desire to stop this behavior for the good of the children. Again, self-importance; simply put, Ms. Baker is trying to be a good parent and instill proper behavior in her children. This may be an extreme case of deviant childhood behavior, surely. But on a higher level, is this not what ALL parents go through with their kids? Encourage decent behavior, discourage deviant behavior. Sounds like the usual thing to me!

And what does this have to do with modern love? Let's break down the combined meme of the column and how it relates to this essay:
Modern trends: obviously, this situation is not a common contemporary problem in modern society. Most parents have separation issues, but not to this extent. The author is dysfunctional.
Love and romance: Child rearing and behavioral modification have nothing to do with love! Or, from another angle: Ms. Baker isn't reflecting on a romantic relationship or the love/care aspect of the relationship with her children. The desired result is to have a loving family with children who function normally in society. She's not trying to have her children love her less; she's just trying to convince them to stop rubbing themselves against her constantly!

So, this essay is irrelevant to the theme of the column, plus it mentions disgusting facts - and, to top it all off, doesn't end with any kind of a satisfying conclusion! We just had to listen to Linda Baker bitch about being a deranged parent with deranged kids. Fucking fantastic.

Thank you, Sunday Styles! I wish I had a bird, whose cage I would line with today's section. And not just for this, but especially for that picture of Karen and Sarah. Those girls are normally cute! How could you violate their images so drastically? They look like the walking undead in Barbara Fernandez's photo. Gross. Please get new photographers in Miami, thx.

Week of 11/27: Further into the Abyss

2005-12-02T14:37:00.000-08:00

Yeah, so on Tuesday I was supposed to have full writeups for each story. It's now Friday at 5:30 and I'm wondering where the fuck the week went.

*sigh*

First up: Modern Love. Raya Kuzyk's entry this week is a doozy. Breaking up with him via Powerpoint?!?! Dumb move. Read for the educational value.

Meet Market? Hah. Alan picked Alison, and they weren't compatible. Not much more to say there. So, maybe next week we can pick things up with some success? Don't bet too heavily on it. Katie, the lovely Columbia junior who's "sick of the college dating scene" (only halfway through it, mind you... maybe it's time she got that fake ID like all the other cool girls), has a selection of three guys who have no distinguishing charatcteristics, aren't very handsome, and seem to be kinda cheesy. Like an episode of Average Joe. Ah, young Katie, every college grad must spend a semester in Disappointment 101! But don't worry... I'm the TA, and I'll go easy on your grading!

Speaking of the Average Joes... Aaron plays games, acts aloof, and looks drunk already. Daniel is the Asian Jack Noseworthy (I've been waiting to use that joke all week! woot!) and seems to be the only person I've ever seen to recommend South Street Seaport for its dining. Gene? *yawn*

My money's on a cold date with Katie and Gene next week. Speaking of cold dates, notice how things always get worse for Meet Market over the fall and winter seasons? Maybe the Post won't take the winter off (not even as a service to journalism), but perhaps that's a hint to the rest of us that blind dates are like white: never after Labor Day! It seems even a bad date seems better in the summer, right? It's just wise not to go free range grazing until things thaw up a bit. Even so, remember that guiltless hookups are always in season.

Week of 11/20 - This Blog Is Going to Shit

2005-11-25T07:52:00.000-08:00

I suppose it's a sign of success in life when you don't have idle time in the week until Friday to make a meaningless blog post, eh? Let's hit this week's articles quickly:

Modern Love is about righting a wrong kid. Or, more accurately, it's about a parent who made a tough decision regarding a child, and anguished about it. Obviously that alone is a compelling story about love, and not anything resembling whining, right? This was the anti-Dan-Savage article - where Savage had conviction, Richard Reiss has fear and doubt. Yet again the Times offers Readers' Digest-style fare as a report of contemporary trends in human bonding. At the very least, the trend is wrong: most parents threaten kids with things like military school, but never follow through. Pffffbt.

Meet Market - you know the drill - gets off to an ugly start when Jodie and Mike fall flat like a pancake. Is it anyone's fault? Not really. Did anyone do anything wrong? Well, Jodie wore Uggs. Disappointing. Otherwise, it just didn't work. And we learned nothing from it. Megu, however, got a slice of publicity that they didn't need at all. (Do a Lexis-Nexis search on "Megu" in your local library to see what I mean. Celebrities, publicists, and gossip hounds are in a constant swarm.)

This week's dater is Alan, the aerodynamically-shaped plastic surgeon. A low-rent Billy Zane look-alike? He's got a nice tie, though. Anyway, he has sophisticated tastes and would require a girl with class; perhaps one that enjoys the finer things in life without needing to be fully entertained by their companion. In other words, no ADD chicks! And we could give a few pounds here, because the liposuction's on the house. Who should we set him up with?

Alison - the smile! A million watts, fellas! Very young and energetic. Also a bit youthful, and perhaps undistinguished if she hangs out at the ESPN Zone. A great girl to hang out with, but not Alan's type.

Leora - the scarf! How stylish! And she's cute, too! Easygoing, fun-loving, and down-to-earth. Again, not Alan's type.

Rose - the head tilt! And that's the best hair we've seen in Meet Market in a long time! Plus, another stylish scarf!

When you go to a bar, what's the first drink you'll order? Champagne, a glass of New Zealand sauvignon blanc or a vodka tonic. Or all three.

Followed by breezy (but merely inventive) mentions of Learjets, European travel, caviar, and more booze. I think she's got potential worldly tastes if she's set up with the right man. Say, oh, a filthy-rich plastic surgeon who needs a vacation-companion wife.

(I call this situation the "pied-a-terre pussy", considering that busy professional men tend to only visit their wives substantially when they're taking a month off of work, and not on a day-to-day basis. Not unlike a condo in Miami. Women also do this, but then you would just call the husband "whipped".)

Rose is obviously the best pick for Alan, but my biggest concern is that, like the others, she is also down-to-earth and youthful. How is that going to play out with Alan? If he's not sociable and she's convivial, probably not very well. However, give these two the benefit of the doubt - if he's even slightly witty and she's even a little bit demure, they might really hit it off.

In any case, we shall see how it played out in a few days...

Week of 11/13 - Modern Love and Meet Market Roundups

2005-11-16T12:53:00.000-08:00

Live blogging from my laptop in Verdi Square at 72nd & Broadway... yes, I felt the need to brag. The Lectern is mobile and worldwide, motherfuckers. Just wait until I learn how to send in my entries through my cellphone from The Patriot...

Mindy Hung's entry this week for Modern Love is surprisingly good. I wish I had more time to rave about it, but I'll get to the point: it's appropriately self-critical where it needs to be, it's critical of relationships where it should be, it's reflective without being ponderous, it sticks to the point... ehhh, just read it. The lesson learned: do try to realize your own limitations and over come them, but don't try to be someone you're not. And also, don't try so hard when dating. I like Mindy and her tale, and I wish her luck.

(end transmission)

==========================

(begin transmission)

Now live blogging from Lolita on the Lower East Side (yeah, I get around town), where I'll do my Meet Market roundup. Vivian chose Jordan, but there's not much to say other than that Vivian had no chemistry with Jordan, he saw the writing on the wall (but was still hopeful!), and they gave each other a lot of mercy hearts. And I'll be merciful to you and end that recap right here, as 9 out of 10 bloggers agree that they'd rather look up a horse's asshole than look at those two posing together.

This week, Jodie the pharma event planner is back to find the man of her dreams... or perhaps just something not too embarassing. (The bar is pretty low when it comes to Meet Market matches)

She describes herself as "outgoing, friendly, fun and honest. Maybe too honest. I know what I want out of life and I work hard for it."

Standard fare. A nice girl who might be undone only by her own pickiness. She doesn't look picky, but you never know... Vivian was picky! Let's give her our best shot for a match, shall we?

Let's rank these guys bottom up:
3. Michael the elder not only commits the sin of using the gym cliche, but he looks like he's never been to one either. (for what it's worth, I'd set him up with my sister if I had one.)

2. Michael the younger is a brainy grad student. Again, pretty decent prospect, except Jodie's not going to be all over him, and there's no way I could pick either Michael when there's...

1. Denzel.

Seriously, he's a personal trainer and his name is Denzel. That name alone gives him a lot of dating credibility. And it's an instant conversation starter.

Now, most people are going with Michael the younger and not with Denzel, but I think Jodie won't lose out either way. That said, I get the feeling that she's going to be picky, and Denzel has the most potential to get past that. I could be wrong, but this is my blog and I'll use it to state whatever opinion I want.

Next week: live blogging from Delaware! (yes, it's possible. After all, I must visit for the day, and there's nothing else to do there!)

Week of 11/06 - Modern Love and Meet Market Roundups

2005-11-10T12:16:00.000-08:00

Yeah, another roundup post. Both of these columns are lucky to get even a half-post of my attention, never mind a full one.

Modern Love gets a little crazy this week. The summary is that Robin Hemley - a male, married professor - finds himself on the wrong end of a student obsession. Yeah, what does that have to do with love? I don't know either. This piece is a great base for a thriller, but it really doesn't fit the theme.

Actually, Hemley's piece is a base for a thriller... his book! And again, we get stung by another author who isn't freelancing about love, but trying very hard to promote his latest non-fiction entry with a chopped-up chapter. I'm extremely disappointed, but we have learned one thing from this: keep sending in those essays, folks! They're apparently desperate for good material if they're passing up their backlog of essay submissions for what amounts to literary press releases.

(I'm angry, and that felt good.)

Next... in the Post, Sweet Janice went wrong and picked Dirty Dustin. I warned against this! Here's how it went down:

Dustin: Having gone on blind dates in the past, I've learned that the course of the evening is pretty much decided in the first minute. This was no different. As we shook hands, I realized I wasn't very attracted to her.

WHAT?!?! Outrageous. She's quirkily adorable! And she knows how to dress! Ugh. Besides, how can you talk with that cheesy goatee and mustache?

I had grown out a ridiculous handlebar mustache as part of a Halloween costume (construction worker).

Oh.

Well, whatever. Dustin's a tool. He comes off as the exact opposite of a gentleman by making many cracks about her throughout the course of the post. Dustin, do New York a favor: keep that mustache, so that what you look like on the outside matches what's inside, buddy.

(I'm angry, and that felt VERY good.)

Next week's dater is Vivian, and... well, I'll let Tom and Laura do the talking:

Meet Vivian, a vivacious accounts manager who says she's a cross between the kind of girl who will help an old lady cross the street and one who'd be on "Girls Gone Wild."

Mental picture: not so good. I always try to stay away from appearance-related jabs, but this case is particularly egregious. While Vivian isn't hideous, she isn't exactly petite. New dating rule: if you don't have the figure of a swimsuit model, it's probably not best to broadcast things like "Vivian's lucky underwear is a black satin thong." That's not to say that there's nothing good about her, but we wouldn't know: much of her profile shows an aggressive approach to attracting men. Including the red hair dye; yes, they called her a redhead in the piece, but high-quality Canon optics always pick up brunette roots.

Her matches?

Brian, who looks like Lance Armstrong's mug shot. Guys, try to smile for your dating headshot; this ain't your football team picture. The good: he's a photographer. (Photographers are hot. Trust me. *wink*) The bad: he goes for the Paris cliche. Otherwise, he looks alright. If anything, we can say he's cerebral. Which means party-loving Vivian might not be his flavor of ice cream.

Next, Alan, the Billy Zane look-alike. He's a plastic surgeon, and his profile certainly reads like a doctor's: brainy, flat, perhaps a bit pretentious with the interests. I can't really dislike him, but nothing strikes me about him that would make me think he'd go great with Vivian.

Finally, we have Jordan with the Brillo goatee. That might scratch a bit if he goes down for the tuna taco, eh? (Note to readers: I'm sleep deprived and out-of-control. I'm ashamed and horrified at my thoughts. Please excuse all these classless things I've been saying. I'll be nice again next week, I promise. Thank you. -ed) He does yoga and drinks Long Island Iced Teas. Great! Opposites attract! He's the perfect fop for Vivian's pool-playing brute! Besides, he doesn't look like he has any dates lined up for the next decade, so he's definitely available for something long term. (Again, sorry.)

My vote sails on the river Jordan. The readers agree by a slight poll margin over Brian, which means I must not be completely crazy and wrong this week. Tune in next week, when I'll be taking bets on which dater will be the first to say at dinner, "Are you gonna finish that?" (REALLY REALLY TERRIBLY SORRY.)

Week of 10/30 - Meet Market and Modern Love Roundups

2005-11-01T12:14:00.000-08:00

Holy shiznit on a cast-iron frying pan! I'm freaking busy lately! With a job, a website, an enabler, a lascivious op-ed columnist, a hipster comedian, a bar game contest... damn, who has time to read the paper on Sunday anymore? Well, we find a way, but the recaps have to be mercifully quick. Merciful on my schedule, anyway; not merciful on the subjects. Muahahaha!

Here's the tagline for Katherine Tanney's Modern Love submission this week:

I am now one of those women who lives alone and goes in and out of relationships while depending on her dogs for long-term companionship.

Yeah. Pets. I'm not even opening that link. Someone do tell me how it went, though.

Now over to Rupert's Tunnel of Love, where Neil chose Rebecca - I liked Rebecca but didn't think she was the best of 3 - for some hot French-Vietnamese fusion action at Sapa. Mmmmm, I guess the Russian-Ethiopian-Mexican place wasn't taking early reservations! Anyway...

Sweet Becky: Neil was dressed very smartly, and I was still wearing my smart work clothes, so we did match a bit... There was absolutely no point in the night where I had wished I was somewhere else, or where I had to use my emergency list of "date questions" to get out of an uncomfortable silence. We had so much to talk about and quite a lot in common. We have similar backgrounds, and although he's not a fan of jumping off cliffs like I am, we both have the desire to jump out of planes at some point, which is almost the same thing, right?

Right. Also, I'm not sure if this is a bad sign or good sign. I usually only talk about jumping off cliffs during the bad dates, but that's just me. What did our well-dressed suitor say?

Natty Neil: We soon found out that we have a lot of interests in common including travel and photography. Becca's a celebrity gossip writer but she hasn't had many star sightings in New York. So it was lucky when, as we were leaving the restaurant, we ran into the guy who played Mr. Big [Chris Noth] on "Sex and the City."

Ah, you violated Jess's black list there, buddy. And besides, what kind of man are you to reference SATC for Chris Noth? He's Detective Mike Logan, for God's sake! Get with the program, buddy.

Anyway, they're a nice pair. They traded phone numbers, along with a total seven hearts. Not bad.

Whither Janice, my favorite? Why, she's up on stage this week! Still a lawyer, still wearing a red dress, still looking fabulous. (Note to self: stop using the word "fabulous", you're not on Queer Eye For The Straight Guy here.) Which guy is the right one for our beautiful bookish barrister?

Dustin's a 27 year old writer who eschews materialism. Or is dirt poor, but hey, we'll give him the benefit of the doubt; Janice can probably carry him with those huge class-action settlement fees she's raking in. He says a date is dependent on conversation, but then lets us know bluntly that it's also dependent on "mind-blowing sex". Nuh-uh, Dustin, this is a family paper.

And now we segue into Story Time:

My first blind date was with a girl I asked out because she was advertising an apartment share, and her voice sounded really sexy on the phone. We had a very awkward dinner, and she later told me she was a lesbian and just accepted my invitation for kicks.

Hah! I think he got his Craigslist ads mixed up!

Next, Mitchell, the trying-too-hard artist:

What would your ideal date be like? I would pick the woman up, go to the airport, fly to Paris and get there in time to go to the Musee d'Orsay and show them my favorite works. Then we'd go to dinner at a really great bistro.

Dude. Paris. So lame to be mentioning that in a dating ad if you've never lived there. Why not just offer to propose on the banks of the Seine? Worst cliche ever. Anyway, he also can't live without his iPod, living up to the materialism cliche; he's the anti-Dustin. And he says:

What do you find attractive/sexy in a woman? Someone who has no idea that they are.

Right, because those low-self-esteem girls spread their legs open so easily, right? Hahah, this guy is cheesy. Or just not a very good profile writer. Also lacks hair in the right places, seems to have a lot of it in the wrong places. I want something better for Janice, please.

Finally, there's Eric, who's got the Mike Piazza goatee way after the fact that Mike Piazza gave it up because it works for no-one. But that'll be my last insult; other than the foot fetish (a massage in the restaurant? Dude, not while we're eating) and the Blues Traveler (okay, maybe I'd rather handle sweaty feet at the dinner table than listen to Blues Traveler), he seems alright. Not stellar, but alright.

As cheesy as Mitchell's profile is, I'm going to go with him. Eric's a big risk because he looks pretty young and we don't know much about him except for a few specific interests. Dustin's sex line disqualified him immediately. And, as much as I'm a wiseass, I think there's a good chance for Janice and Mitchell to find something in common and experience passion like never before. In Paris.

Week of 10/23 - Modern Love and Meet Market Roundups

2005-10-26T11:22:00.000-07:00

Modern Love this week tackles the tale of a third wheel guy. I recommend it as a solid read. At first, I read through it and found it to be a little annoying. Then I took the stick out of my ass, leaned backward in my chair, and enjoyed the ride. It's fairly absurd, based on funny facts about people who are friends of couples. I like it. Go read and enjoy.

Meet Market gets hot and heavy this week... Baroness Sheri took my recommendation to see Joel, and here's how it went:

Sheri: Joel wanted to go on from the Chemist Club, but I decided it would be more expedient to end the date there. He was being very affectionate, so I had to mumble a reminder about my "24-hour rule." I always wait 24 hours before getting intimate - I find that it eliminates 90 percent of the worst candidates!

Rowr! What a hot date we have here! There were many more hilarious things in their recollections, but we have to move on. I have a nasty picture in my head of two mature individuals rubbing their old wrinky genitalia together, and I'm having trouble keeping my lunch down. Must go back to the younger crowd to make the nausea and spinning feeling go away.

Neil is back this week to choose next week's girl. No smokers. No cat people. Must have dog. Who's the right gal for our carrot-topped suitor?

Janice, 30, is also carrot-topped. She's the picture of classic beauty (it's the red dress, I know. I'm a sucker for that). She drinks Jack and Coke. She's a lawyer who writes with brevity. I love her. This contest is over already.

Rachel's in ad sales. Everything about her screams "dating-scene-veteran yuppie." Not that it's a bad thing. Still, there's nothing particularly outstanding about her. Next.

Becca is 22. Too young and too adorable to hand over to an older, mature man. I like her, though; she's cool, she's from Austin, and she's totally cute. She should be back in a future week to pick some guys out.

That said, Janice wins. The polls have Becca barely leading the other two, but I know better. End of discussion.

Now, for some more entertainment, check out my article on Gothamist about the Spanglish Sandwich. Completely unrelated to dating; food is my other favorite subject! Enjoy.

New York Post Meet Market: The Baroness and the Bachelors

2005-10-19T13:15:00.000-07:00

We head into another week of Meet Market with some good news: Kat the Guggenheim Gal chose Steve and hit it off fabulously with him.

We sent them to the trendy new Upper West Side restaurant Loft

Hmmm, is this near Jake's Dilemma? Do I have to get on the 1 train to get there? Trendy indeed.

Steve: My first impression of Kat was that she was vivacious and pretty.

Translation: "Hmmm, will she sleep with me?"

Kat: I think he is very handsome, but more important he gave me a big smile when he said hello, and he genuinely looked pleased to see me.

Translation: "Hmmm, he wants to sleep with me. But he's good looking, so I don't mind."

Steve: I felt that both of us had a pretty even share in the conversation, and it took no effort for it to progress. Most of the date was spent talking about this whole "blind date" experience. We also chatted about our backgrounds, our interests and whatever topics randomly spawned. I can't say that I remember any particular part of our conversation, but I think that's a good thing because it means I never felt uncomfortable, confronted or even had to work on it. A good conversation contains two people of similar intellect and interests, and we certainly had that.

Translation: "As the night continued, I still wanted to sleep with her."

Kat: I think we were both pleasantly surprised how normal the other person was. We told some bad dating stories and traded background information. It was very comfortable.

Translation: "I might sleep with him. Someday. Not today."

Steve: We exchanged numbers, but, alas, we did not kiss. Be it platonic or romantic, I would certainly not turn down an opportunity to see Kat again. She was fun to be around. Good conversa-tionalists are hard to find. The date couldn't have been better.

Translation: "Another night with Rosie Palm. Maybe Kat will sleep with me on the next date."

Kat: It's not like there were sparks flying all over the place, but we did seem to get each other. I would definitely go out with him again, because the date was a hundred times better than what I had expected.

Translation: "Tell Rosie Palm not to get too attached, stud." *wink*

Hot stuff, people.

Who's stepping up to the plate this week? Baroness Sheri, who is a female over the age of 30. I'm confused. It looks like there was a switchup with the Dating column from AARP magazine. She claims to be "ageless". She looks like the type of woman that bartenders ask for ID just to charm her, and who falls for it every time.

If some lucky guy is buying, the baroness says she'd order French champagne. If it's on her dime, she said she'd settle for a glass of sauvignon blanc, preferably from New Zealand's Cloudy Bay.

Bah. There's a difference between "treat me like a lady" and "buy me nice shit." One's a whole lot less flattering than the other.

What does she find sexy? "Men who are smart, quiet and very capable in bed." And why should a former sex columnist settle for anything but the best?

This one's a bit dangerous for the general dating pool. And she's got lofty expectations. At least all of her suitors are age appropriate, but can they keep up with her?

Joel might be able to. He's an attorney and a restauranteur; the best of both worlds! He's got a restaurant to eat in, and the type of income to pay for everything else. Now if that isn't masculine, what is?

What's sexy? Petite, great legs and eyes that engulf you.
What would your ideal date be like? Sunset drinks in the autumn, dinner and then a walk on the boardwalk at the West Side Highway.

So, like, why even look at the other two guys? This one rocks.

Next: Russ, 41, social-studies teacher. Sex columnist and a social-studies teacher. Yeah. Sure. Let's move on.

Finally: Rob, 39, jewelry-magazine editor. Sheri is probably older than him. Also, he's a comedy writer. He looks okay (to be fair, Russ wasn't a bad guy either), but again looks to be generally unsuitable for Sheri's expectations.

And it is settled. Joel, Sheri, trendy restaurant, trip to Europe for a second date. Easy.

New York Times Modern Love: If Your Son Finds Your Article Unreadable, It's Got Nothing To Do With Autism

2005-10-19T12:51:00.000-07:00

Claire Scovell LaZebnik gives us this week's Modern Love piece: a tale of being a worrying mother of a child with autism, and all of the emotions that come with it.

(what, you expected more?)

(okay, I'll give you more. But really, that's the only interesting aspect of the piece. The rest of it is Readers' Digest material.)

Claire's son - to be referred to hereafter as "He-boy", since Claire never names him - has had a somewhat successful therapy program to help him cope with autism, and therefore is quite functional (as those in the psychiatry field would say). But his autism is not completely "healed" - it's still there, and the symptoms are still highly problematic.

But in what sense? He-boy is in excellent physical health, carries on with most normal functions of a teenage boy, and seems to be far ahead of many of his autistic peers. Claire, though, has other things she's concerned with. Like girls. Relationships. Porn.

To this I say: so fucking what?

The problem we have here is not with the topic, but in how it's conveyed. This article is basically a teaser for her book, and I'm sure both book and article were sculpted in a way such that they appeal to a mass audience. As such, Claire speaks of the challenges of autism in the context of the difficulties of navigating typical teenage social structures and life issues. Sure, that's appealing to a mass audience; every teenage boy goes through shit trying to make it from 6th grade to high school graduation, and most caring mothers worry about these things. I suppose everyone can relate to that. But in presenting her concerns, Claire takes all the edge - and air - out of the story. Where Malcolm Gladwell can write about something as mundane as a paper clip factory and make it seem completely fascinating, Claire writes here about a serious and thoroughly misunderstood psychological condition and makes it seem dull.

She's worried if her son can love and be loved. Claire, we all worry about that for ourselves already.

On a serious note, best wishes to He-boy and his family in dealing with his condition.

New York Post Meet Market: Kirsten Sees The Worst That Can Happen, Gets Invited To A Maids Of Dishonor Show

2005-10-11T12:15:00.000-07:00

I love going on blind dates. It's a great way to meet people in New York, so I was not at all nervous. Really, the worst thing that can happen is that conversation drags, and since The Post was picking up our tab, how bad could it be?

Well, well, welllllll Kirsten, let me tell you something...

Sean picked Kirsten, who I thought was a really cool girl but didn't think was a good match for Sean and his hair. And whaddyaknow, it didn't work out between them. The story from Kirsten:

To be honest, we were not physically attracted to each other, so I felt we both just had made up our mind to have a really fun, friendly night.

Well, if that ain't the kiss of death, I don't know what is.

We didn't leave until about 11:30 because we were having such a fun time. In the end, though, we parted as friends.

From my experience, some girls are exceedingly nice even when a date just doesn't work out. It's kind of confusing, actually; they just won't fess up to what's rubbing them the wrong way. But luckily, Sean fills in the details for us:

We chatted mostly about work at first - she is a p.r. person, and I was interested to get an insight into her world. There is a glamorous side to it - going to parties for exciting things, so it was fascinating to hear about it.

P.R. is so glamorous. Glamorous, people! P.R. is so hot. Mmmm, continue.

We quickly discovered that we are both Taurus, which made it even easier. But I have to say that I doubt Kirsten could keep up with me on a full-on night out - but I could be wrong. I led the conversation at first, but that was cool. Tauruses take a while to warm up; once we got going we had a great conversation.

Wow, this is a guy who knows his horoscope really well. That's usually a girly thing. Maybe he gets his astrological advice from the Times? During a manicure, perhaps?

Girls are always quite interested to speak to a makeup artist

So modest. And glamorous.

I told her about my band - I recorded a disc recently called "The Gutters of Heaven" with my band, which is called Sean Allen Fenn and the Maids of Dishonor - you can get it on iTunes. She seemed to be interested in that side of my life - but now I think she may have been humoring me. I invited her to see me a few nights later, but she didn't show. I am going to invite her to my next gig and hope I have more luck then!

OMG. He's plugging his band in the column, and on the date! It's as if she's not a potential hookup, but rather a potential audience member! Because that counts more!

Well, maybe she was humoring you, Sean. That's my theory.

Anyway, who's turn is it this week?

Kat's back! Now we know that she's "the beautiful assistant to the director of the Guggenheim Museum." Even more specific info! Give out her home address, why don't you?

Kat's got a better profile this week. I like her a little more, to be honest. I have good hope for this week's date. Now, for some quotables about bad dates past:

"When I asked him where he wanted to eat, he said, 'Someplace cheap,' and later said that he only paid for the movie because he found a $20 while we were waiting in line."

I've got a better one for you. Some idiot I know went out with some new friends and, following a cheap trick he'd learned from other friends, used his credit card at a kiosk to prepay for all the tickets - at the children's rate! The ushers never check that, so theoretically you can save a bundle that way. But the new friends were horrified, and almost walked out of the theater. Luckily, after a big hassle, they all used the tickets as-is with no problems getting admission - but not without my idiot friend feeling utterly embarrassed. (my friend... wasn't me, it was a friend... yeah, um, that's right...)

Back to Kat, she's to choose from:

Julian the peace officer. Peace officer? What does he do, work security for Ben & Jerry's? I think they meant police officer. Regardless, Julian's a big softie. Nothing particularly special about him. He does not seem very cosmopolitan, hence I don't think he's a good match for Kat (who seems somewhat sophisticated). Next, please.

Second, we have Steven, the research analyst. Quotables:

If your life were a soundtrack, what song or specific lyrics would be playing? "Firestarter" by Prodigy. It's a high-energy song, and I like to liven things up and start a little something. Living an exciting life is the only way to do it.

I personally love the Prodigy (not to be confused with the Mobb Deep rapper), and I agree with this philosophy. This is probably why I'm dateless, though, and I predict that Steven will be as well. Girls don't go for intense, Euro-techno types of guys. Also:

I once had a first date where we had both watched a lot of recent movies before we met, so we decided that we would pick the film when we went to the theater. Needless to say, "Event Horizon" was not a good first-date flick. The relationship did not go very far.

First, indeed. Second, did you know that the song that plays over the end credits is another Prodigy song, "Funky Shit"? They even sampled the Beastie Boys for that one. I love that. More useless pop trivia for you. Next, please.

Finally, we have Mike, the stand-up comedian. And like most stand-up comedians, he looks like he has Down Syndrome. (Note: I'm personally going to get in a ton of trouble for that remark. You know, aside from going to Hell. For that, I think some of my comedian friends are going to send me there sooner rather than later.) Maybe that's just a bad picture? Looks better from the side, possibly? He is a very nice and sweet guy, though, as the following would show:

How would you describe yourself? I'm a sweet guy with a good sense of humor. I am a very caring person (worked as a social worker for years . . . great job, but very draining).

I now feel bad for making fun of him. I mean, those eyes are just a little too wide apart, but that doesn't mean I should judge or anything. (Okay, I'll stop.) I have nothing but good marks for Mike. He's even funny, as he makes a witty comment about trading "a caring disposition" for peanut butter and milk. Also:

I dance pretty well for a white guy with a limp!

Ummm... right. So he's not a male model by any means, but he won't do you wrong.

Nice guys finish last, usually. In this case, all these guys finish last, because none of them seem to be the type of guy that would keep a girl like Kat well-occupied. It's nobody's fault, really; I just don't think any of these guys are the type to be going out for Grey Goose Martinis. Specifically, Kat's not looking for a blue-collar beau, so Julian's out. Kat's also seemingly not looking for someone jokey and modest, so Mike's also out. That leaves us with Fast Beats Steven, who doesn't seem like a particularly great match for Kat... but then again, you never know.

I wish them all luck. Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to run quickly from the rocks that are being thrown at me from the comedian crowd...

New York Times Modern Love: Add The Trophy Times Clip To The List

2005-10-11T09:50:00.000-07:00

Well, what do you want me to say about this week's Modern Love? Martha Moffett's essay this week is an atrocity.

I began displaying him almost immediately, once I'd reviewed his credentials. They were just about right: Harvard, N.E.H. grant, a fellow at Yale, two sabbaticals in Africa, where he labored at compiling a Chamba dictionary.

Holy shit, please stop the madness.

Here's the thing: I'm not taking this as a literal reading, but rather as a display of mock-superficial sentimentality. However, one thing I've learned from this essay is this: mock-superficial sentimentality might not be as morally abhorrent as the real thing, but it's certainly as obnoxious to read in short semi-non-fiction.

I can't relate to this at all. I pass on the review.

So, while we're here and needing to fill the space, let's do a head-to-head matchup of Modern Love vs. Meet Market. I know that's the battle that everyone's been waiting for. Let's do this:

VS. - How Each Column Tackles Romanticism
ML: Hire a bunch of freelancers to bitch about their old ex-partners, because their best friends are clearly sick of hearing it.
MM: Set hipsters up on dates, pretend that someone's supposed to fall in love, report on the comical results.
Winner: Meet Market

VS. - Greatest Success Story (over the Lectern's review period)
ML: Kirsten Allen Major's movie-like happy ending
MM: Pamela and Ian
Winner: Modern Love

VS. - Greatest Disaster (over the Lectern's review period)
ML: Stephen Elliot can't keep a girl to himself.
MM: King Worst Red Ryan and Former Queen Worst Jenny
Winner: Meet Market

VS. - Funniest Moment
ML: Spike Gillespie:

...all I could do was lube myself up with alcohol and fall into bed with one man or another, all of them terribly wrong.

MM: Youri's Mountain Climbing Expedition
Winner: Modern Love

VS. - Very Very Gay
ML: Dan Savage
MM: John the actor (the first potential pick for that week)
Winner: Modern Love

VS. - Most Likely to Dodgeball You
ML: Sandra Barron
MM: Queen Worst Brooke
Winner: Modern Love

VS. - Dangerous Activities
ML: Hitchhiking
MM: Cock Punching
Winner: Meet Market

VS. - Dubious Semi-Celebrity Appearance
ML: Dan Savage, once again
MM: Carmine Gotti
Winner: Modern Love

VS. - One Reason To Have Hope For Society
ML: The romantic movie to-be
MM: Jason the Closer
Winner: Meet Market

Final Winner: Modern Love

Ah, so that settles it. Even with a lot of stinker essays, Modern Love still leads the pack. Perhaps around this time next year, Meet Market can catch-up a bit and come out on top... or Modern Love may still dominate (so to speak). I guess we'll see...

New York Post Meet Market: The Curse of the Jewels!

2005-10-04T11:19:00.000-07:00

Tom and Laura learn this week that if you play with bombs, sometimes you... um, blow up.

Kevin, in this case, was the bomb. I don't know why Erin picked him over the other two (well, one of them seemed to have a bit of a creepy profile), but sure enough, she went with the geek and she got a geek. She was so surprised, too!

The conversation was a bit strained. I tried to make the best of it and kept asking normal, open-ended questions. It struck me as odd that when I asked what his favorite book was, he came back with "I don't know if you are in to wrestling ..."

Hahahah! She sure did layeth the smack down on him!** How bad was this date?

The good news is that the food was wonderful and the staff divine. The service was impeccable - I would recommend Meli Melo to any of my friends. It's a lovely place for a first date.

Emphasis mine, as it was written such that this was the ONLY good news. What else happened?

...my phone rang, and thankfully it was my friend Corrin, with a "dire emergency" (mine). I told her to come down to the restaurant. She does. She sits at the bar. Kevin leaves. I join her and we laugh about what I might consider one of my worst dates ever.

Ah, the old escape plan! Never fails when done correctly... well, except that Kevin found it boorish yet still didn't pick up a clue. He says:

It was rude that she picked up her cell while I was talking to her. I tried to be nice and polite, but I guess nice guys finish last.

And yet he still gave her a heart and a half. At least she was honest about it: NO HEARTS! Haha! These two didn't have a snowball's chance in hell to begin with, and they're both rather clumsy with dating, so I won't lament any lost love here. Also, I won't assign any King or Queen Worst honors; that would just add insult to injury. (Plus, these two aren't really funny; they're just sad.)

**I know how old that reference is. I know the Rock hasn't been in the league in 3 years, and that he wasn't the epitome of coolness or talent to begin with. Most important, it shows clearly that I don't watch wrestling anymore. That's a good thing, men. Learn from my example.

Onto this week's daters! Can we get this train back on the track?

Maybe Sean can help us get to higher ground. Or not! What an ego on this one...

He modestly describes himself as "awesome," and says that if we were to ask his friends about him, they would say, "Sean is an enigma."

Cripes.

He's looking for a gal with "long brown hair, great skin and confidence."

Sean says his ideal evening would be "spontaneous," and that he loves the New York dating scene because "no one settles down, it's perfect." Indeed.

I left in that final "indeed" because you should picture Laura rolling her eyes while having to copy-and-paste that from his profile questionnaire. Did I mention he's a "musician/makeup artist?" And you see that "too-cool-for-school" look on his face in his profile picture? Yes, readers, this guy is doomed.

Onto the futile and merciless exercise of picking his next miserable date:

Kat is an "Assistant at Guggenheim". One, I'm not sure it's cool to be publishing company info with these profiles. That's just a little too much of a privacy violation, isn't it? Two, that sounds a little self-congratualtory: "I work at the Guggenheim." Oh, you're big shit, aren't you? (Sense a match coming? I do!)

How would you describe yourself? I definitely show two sides at any given time - the energetic, witty art-world girl who is constantly laughing at herself and entertaining everyone around her at modesty's expense, and the more serious, deadpan poet type who is observing everything about her. I beat a lot of balls ... but tell a mean story and with the voice of a porn star, to boot.

Emphasis mine, again. Well, she wears her ego on her sleeve too! Maybe this date won't be so miserable after all! Well, except when Sean gets his balls beaten! Ouch! Need ice for that, buddy?

Next, Kirsten, the PR assistant. The good things about Kirsten: she's humble, clean, intelligent, trustworthy, down-to-earth, and pretty! Almost perfect! I think I have a crush on her! (Do e-mail me if this Post thing doesn't work out.) But fellas, I've got bad news for you: RED SOX FAN. Never a Red Sox fan, and absolutely not in October. Next!

(Still email me, though; we'll get along great in the winter.)

Finally, we have Annie, the hot grad student.

If your life were a soundtrack, what song or specific lyrics would be playing? "There's gotta be more to life than chasing down every temporary high to satisfy me."

Hit the slopes, anyone? Is Sean down for a night of the ol' Kate Moss? Just kidding, folks - this is why, though, it's most important to scrutinize your answers to dating profile questions. You don't want to give any answers that could be misinterpreted. Other than that, Annie looks like a superstar. Another solid pick for a nice guy.

But Sean's not a typical nice guy, is he? No, he's a rockstar-cum-Avon-lady! Let's see how hardcore he is when he gets a cock punch from Kat! Owwww! Ow ow ow! Seems like half the readers also have it in for Sean's balls to get busted, as he's leading the polls by a comfy margin. So, next week, come back for...

Dammit, between my laughing and crotch-flinching, I just can't come up with a good ending here! All I can say is that it's gonna hurt, a lot! Let's just have an emergency urologist on standby, please!

New York Times Modern Love: Riddle Me This, Riddle Me That

2005-10-04T09:50:00.001-07:00

"Why do you think Jenna left me?"

Ah, if only most essays could get off to a great rolling start like that.

Brian Goedde becomes this week's subject of observation as he searches the world around him for an answer within. What's funny about this essay for me is that I was completely mislead by the apparent subject of the essay until the very end, at which point the true moral of this story is delivered in a nice, neat package. No, the essay isn't about Jenna, who broke off her long-term relationship with our protagonist suddenly and unexpectedly over the phone. (That bitch!) The essay is, instead, a look at how people interact with others and how they view themselves.

The entire trip is a little dizzying, but I wouldn't consider it a fault of the essay. While it all boils down to how Brian views himself and how other people view him as well (we really never do figure out how Jenna and Brian can appropriately reconcile), there is an additional layer of depth added by the complications of his non-romantic relations with others: the rebound-sex friend; the mutual friend of the couple; the close relative of the estranged partner, with whom Brian will end up estranged as well; and the mother who abandoned him. The twist is that he learns something about his relationship with each of these people as well along the way.

Unfortunately, he learns nothing about himself. And neither do we.

My tendency toward cynicism leads me to the possibility that we're dealing here with a classic case of the unreliable narrator. That is, Brian is not being honest with himself and cannot be honest to us or anyone. This dark theory is only strengthened by the fact that he cannot seem to get support or a straight answer out of people who are close to him.

That said, I want to believe him. I do think that he's somewhat narcissistic for taking on this project, but I don't see him as overflowing with arrogance. I think that, had he been given a helpful answer from someone, anyone (even Jenna, who seemingly gave him a very lame send-off), he might have been able to find what he was looking for. I also have a tendency to trust him because he's not trying to find a way to force his will or viewpoint; he's just trying to get a clue. I wouldn't hold it against him that he's clueless here; having been in a long-term relationship that came to an abrupt end, he never had much to work with from the start.

Still, this is all about his relationships with the others. Of those, he fares best with Cynthea, the "mutual friend". She gives him some very honest and useful factual information that Jenna was unwilling to provide. (As I read this essay, I found myself growing more distaste for this flaky Jenna character with each passing paragragh - did you not? How do you sympathize with someone who completely abandons a 10-year partner for apparently no good reason? But that's it's own topic.) Brian's emotional fragility becomes slightly visible when she takes one of Cynthea's statements to be a comparative insult, but otherwise he gets away pretty cleanly.

He does not do so well with his rebound friend. She sits high on her stool, smokes her Marlboro, and tells Brian:

Over time she developed needs and desires, needs that maybe she didn't even know she was having. And whether or not she told you about these needs, you weren't fulfilling them.

Brian took this a little too much to heart, but give the guy a break, he's been given a bad blow by his ex. For someone who didn't seem to really know what the hell was going on, this just sounds like some sort of feminist ranting about women's emotional needs. You can already tell I'm unsympathetic and unimpressed. "Whether or not she told you about these needs?" Fuck you.

Next is the Stepdad-in-law-was-to-be. (*untying my tongue*) Apparently, this guy is all wisdom and no facts. That in itself is forgivable - at no point does Brian pretend that he's not asking for much with these questions - but this turns quickly into a tale of disassociation. Both of us Brians (reader and writer) were pretty saddened by the sound of the wind rushing out of the relationship between writer-Brian and Stepdad-in-law-was-to-be. Pretty common phenomenon, actually; stop dating the girl for any reason, and none of the friends and family want to even know you any more. (Best personal anecdote: my ex's friends talked some loud shit behind my back after our breakup... you know, after she cheated on me, then cheated on me again, and then lied that she was raped by a guy who she really cheated with. But they were right, I was such a dick for calling it off. And no, I'm not bitter about it.)

Finally, we have Mom. She's obviously a douchebag, and there's really no way around this fact. But Brian's experience with her lead to an important (if cold) lesson about Modern Love: anyone and everyone can be a douchebag, and sometimes (many times) you need to deal with your emotions on your own.

As much as Brian's whiny emotional questions invoked my gag reflex up until this point, I was pleased to see that he finally decided that he was going to deal with this on his own. No half-baked "personal journey" was going to help him with anything, save for his clips. He realizes this, he becomes his own man, and writes it artfully. Then he takes his half-baked personal journey and gets it published in the Times. Bravo.

Week of 9/25: Modern Love and Meet Market Roundups

2005-09-28T10:46:00.000-07:00

Busy week, so we'll avoid detail just to quickly go over the basics.

Modern Love was fairly depressing this week, although not nearly as depressing as the piece that Sunday Styles did on the Spin Doctors... anyway, Carolyn Megan becomes a reluctant motherly figure and shares some thoughts on it. It's funny how her sister's impending death from cancer gets pushed aside, because that's not nearly modern enough for this column. It's perhaps more trendy to not want kids. Anyway, I refuse to rip into this piece, because it was rather touching, contemplative, and well-written. It reminds us why people respect this newspaper.

Meet Market was also gold this week, but in this case for comic reasons. Last week's date was an absurd success, while this week's picks are good for a chuckle.

Jake chose Michelle and found success, so we give Tom and Laura credit for yet another victory. I'd say I was wrong in my predictions last week, but it does seem that Michelle swings enthusiastically from Jake's comedy-filled nuts and I mentioned that possiblity as a potential path to hookup success. Also, I'm almost never wrong.

Next week's date match is between Erin, a nice-n'-pretty girl wearing a pearl necklace (obvious "very hot-date" joke skipped for brevity's sake), and three guys who are really testing my self-imposed ban on commenting about people's appearances. Kevin says, "Physically, you could say I'm the average Joe." I'd agree that, picture + profile + job title, he'd be perfect as a contestant on Average Joe. Logan, meanwhile, cannot live without "Rooftops, walk-in kaleidoscopes and fog." If I were a girl, I'd have read that and thought, "I'm going to get raped on someone's creepy rooftop." Kalik's profile is much better than the others' (although it's so good that it seems to have been copied out of a book). My favorite line:

What do you like doing when you're not working? Sometimes relaxing with the quality people in my life, and other times just enjoying some much-needed solitude. I do enjoy going to church, the gym and dancing.

That was absolutely fantastic until the end. Gym and dancing, the Mary-Kate and Ashley of dating profile cliches. And it's my favorite line because I love to see the two juxtaposed as an unholy duo of contrived personal activities. We've been down this road before, I'm sure it needs no repeat explanation.

Kalik gets my pick, the voters agree, and we're done. Wasn't that easy?

New York Post Meet Market: He's Quite A Youngin'

2005-09-20T12:15:00.000-07:00

The all-new Tom & Laura Show is up for scrutiny again this week:

Can I get through last week's date quickly? Let's give it a try: Martha picked Eric, Martha likes Eric, Eric likes Martha, and they'll probably remain just friends. They're a couple of music-loving hipster mopes, so this was the best possible romantic result. Of note is the fact that they departed from one another at Union Square, so feel free to attribute both of them with separate L.E.S. and Williamsburg addresses, naturally. My only burning question: since they're both former DJs, did either of them try to talk to the manager at Piola to see if one of them could get on the turntables? (Knowing that hipsters do shit like that all the time, and that Italian restaurants don't have turntables, you're supposed to laugh at that.)

This week's chooser is Jake, the full time comedian who missed a date with Amanda but is now up for more Meet Market laughs. His profile this time is cleaned up a bit from the attempt at a laugh-riot he had up the last time (when I called him a freak, literally). If anything, this displays the contrast between Laura and Mackenzie, International Woman of Mystery; while Laura is compassionate and thoughtful, Mackenzie had a wicked sense of humor and let everyone live and die by their own bizarre answers to the profile questionnaire. While the matches might turn out better, Laura just made my job a lot harder. (Thanks, Laura! *sneer*)

Who are we going to set up Jake with? No one in his age category, apparently! He's listed as 23 years old, while none of his dating matchups are younger than 28! (One is 33.) True, age ain't nothin' but a number - yet I have a feeling that this fact alone means there's a practically zero chance of any setup turning into a long-term romance. Women simply do not pursue younger men in most circumstances - and in the rare cases that they do, Jake is not the type of strapping young male that those kind of women pursue. So we're basically looking at a loss already. But we'll give this match our best attempt.

Michele is a non-vampire assistant:

What are three things you can't live without? Music/art, water and garlic.

Lovely. I hope it's an Italian restaurant again next week.

How would you describe yourself? I would say that I'm an intelligent and intuitive artist/human who is enjoying her life in New York City.

I can already see she's too serious for Jake, unless she's going to be his adoring audience or something like that.

Next is Naomi, a "technologist." I have no idea what a technologist does, other than bullshit on their dating profiles about what they do for a living. She enjoys chick lit and weekly dinner dates. In other words, not the type to be dating a comedian.

Our story of the week:

What was your worst date like? A guy told me he wanted to take me to a place where people go to have fun. He then pulled in to a parking lot of a seedy short-stay motel. I proceeded to get out of his car and got the hell away from him.

Fucking scary! You date the wrong men, babe! But at least we now know that "technologist" is not a cover for being a $2 prostitute, so I'm slightly relieved. So I've narrowed her career down to medical technician, IT support, or Best Buy stockperson.

Finally, we have Dorie, the 28 year old. She's an event planner; maybe she can book Jake on a couple of gigs! Also:

What's sexy to you? What do you look for in a man? Sexy is a guy with a sense of humor about himself and about life...

Jake has a brutally overwhelming sense of humor! And we have a winner!

The polls agree with my assessment; Dorie is winning. Let's hope Jake makes the right choice and disappoints Dorie by being 10 years younger, 1/10th as rich, and 20 times more goofy-looking than she'd prefer. Maybe she'll even use the romance-killing phrase, "You're 23? Aww, you're still a baby!"

(Methinks the Post's summer winning streak is over. And won't be back for a while.)

New York Times Modern Love: Losing My Appetite

2005-09-20T08:30:00.000-07:00

Ominous sign of missing quality - this week's link comes unadorned:
My Dinners With Andrew (New York Times)

Apparently, after last week's lovely Dan Savage piece (my favorite instance of, "Am I reading the right newspaper?"), the Times editors figured that us viewers had exceeded our satisfaction quotas for the month and decided it necessary this time to lay a big turd for a column. Sara Pepitone is back, inciting the rage of freelancers everywhere who are starving while awaiting the chance to excoriate their ex-partners in the Paper of Record. Sara's last effort, to summarize, was a piece about learning of your significant other's impending work termination - to her credit, it was a much more interesting piece than that description made it sound. This time, though, we witness her compare an old flame to a new date, watch the new date go awry, and...

Well, there's nothing else to it, really. And, this time, it is less interesting than it sounds in summary.

The article is mostly about Andrew. She dated Andrew, she loved Andrew, she lost Andrew, and she cries about Andrew at dinner with a supportive but not-Andrew gentleman. Food and restaurant service is prominently involved as a device symbolizing emotional connection and comfort, but I cynically believe that it's only because Sara has a cookbook coming out soon. It says so in the byline! Gotta love those freelance essayists; the piece is always the means to an end, never a goal in and of itself. (And you wonder why magazines eschew essays for service pieces as of late.)

In case you think I'm being harsh in my criticsm about the commercialism of this piece:

Later we realized the other place reviewed in The Times

The food promotion extends to the Times' dining reviews itself! I didn't know they felt it necessary to pimp themselves in their own paper to keep people interested. Perhaps it would have been a tasteful editorial choice to leave out the name of the newspaper and reference the reviews obliquely? After all, this sort of self-back-patting is more like something the Post would do.

The emotions expressed in the column are rather standard - they are not extraordinary, but are at least sincere and untarnished by hubris. I would think the Times would rise above schmaltz, but in the end I appreciate humility in a column where it comes rarely.

My final analysis is to see how this column represents the theme of Modern Love, and how it reflects romance and interpersonal relationships in this day and age, and the message is this: We are all yuppies who don't have time to cook for ourselves. Ms. Pepitone seems to have dust gathering on the pots in her kitchen, because her intimate moments all come in public restaurants. That's the "modern" spin here. What ever happened to eating at home? It makes me nostalgic for the old days, when bonds came from shared meals at the dining room table. Perhaps Ms. Pepitone would find more success in her personal relationships if she learned how to cook!

(The same goes for Andrew. Back down, feminists.)

New York Post Meet Market: Initiation

2005-09-13T14:41:00.000-07:00

We have a special theme for today's Meet Market review (to see the original, as always, look right here).

Mackenzie, International Woman of Mystery, has departed for another section of the newspaper. It's supposed to be called "@Work", but I'll bet dollars to donuts that Republican bashing, gossip items, and Asian numbers games will eventually be crammed into it.

In her place, our new co-writer is Laura Vogel. Let's give Laura a proper hazing, shall we? Everything that's wrong this week is officially her fault. None of it will probably be something she could have helped (especially being new and all), but we'll blame her anyway. We'll make a sport out of it.

First up, Chris from last week chose Anna. I recommended this pairing last week, but there was no rhyme or reason to it other than some distant form of egotism on my part. Well, who cares why? It worked anyway.

Chris comes perilously close to the "wow, you look better in person!" screw-up:

I had seen a picture of her, but it was still a little surprising to meet her for the first time in person. She looked great, wearing a black dress, definitely athletic, and I was struck by her nice smile.

Nice! I think she looks particularly cute in the picture used from the date. Chris, however, continues to look particularly bony. Aren't we glad the Post provided him with a meal?

In the annals of bullet-dodging:

Chris: Then the conversation pretty much went on a tear. She has traveled to some exotic spots. We both have traveled through Eastern Europe, but that turned out to be not so much of a coincidence, seeing how Anna seems to have been almost everywhere, not just Eastern Europe - East Asia, obscure little islands and places like that.

Somehow, I feel lucky to not have been forced to explain on my own date that Staten Island is an exotic trip for me. Perhaps Chris offered a more robust travel itinerary:

Anna: Chris and I talked about traveling (we've both been on some pretty interesting trips) and skiing (Chris makes a lot of winter ski trips) and any other topic that came up.

Good to play up the skiing angle - because if you're more of a beach person this time of year, you're SOL. Any other quotables, guys?

Anna: At one point, I told him I wanted to go to MoMA to see the Cezanne-Pissarro exhibit. He pulled out an extra guest pass he happened to have and gave it to me. Nice!

Bribery! Well, since he didn't seem to bring flowers, I guess we can consider this a rebound move. Laura, why didn't you tell him to bring flowers?! Big mistake!

In the end, they kissed good night and hope to see each other again. Another win for Cupid Murdoch.

This week, we have to set up Martha, who stands gloriously in front of a teal background. She looks like she's about to tell us the weather. She's "happy, social, silly, creative, independent, funny and a tad eccentric." Plus, she likes sewing! You know how much I like that! After all, with all these socks and all these holes...

Our story of the week: Martha lets the man of her dreams slip away -

Martha's worst date came courtesy of a day trader who couldn't stop blabbing about his bills.
"He spent the whole night talking about how much money he makes gambling and how he's so great," she recalls. "He promptly got drunk. Apparently when he's drunk, his favorite thing to talk about is how all women are only out for his money. When I took offense, he swore at me. When I decided to leave, he chased me outside, angry that I wasn't going home with him."

Umm, that's not even funny. Damn day-trading pricks. Laura, why didn't you give Martha an escape route for this nightmare date? (Note that I'm running really thin on these initiation ideas so far. Pretty soon I'm just going to have her drink a quart of milk and run up and down 10 flights of stairs like all the other Meet Market pledges.)

Who do we pair with the beautiful and fabulous Martha?

Hey, it's Phillippe again! Different pic, same "all-you-can-eat" line. Oh, and he drinks a lot. While listening to NPR. Well, if that's what gets you through Garrison Kellior...

Then there's Eric, the animator. That job sounds kind of fun. What can we glean about him from his profile?

What do you like doing when you're not working? People-watch, walk around Manhattan, play records and eat trail mix.

Oh, and animate stuff.

How would you describe yourself? A tall, gaunt man with a sardonically irreverent sense of humor.

(*scrambles to look that up in the dictionary...*)

What's attractive? What's sexy? Intelligence, jocular sense of humor, confidence and someone who has a positive body image.

Jocular? Well, I don't know if she likes contact sports, but Martha can sew! I kinda like Eric better than Phillippe at this point.

(Sorry, Phillippe. You'll meet someone someday. Hey Laura, why are you making Phillippe so unlucky at this dating game? Better have him be the lead dater soon; we don't want to leave this poor guy to fend for himself at TGI Friday's.)

Finally, there's Dan the finance guy. He answers my favorite question:

What animal do you most resemble and why? I guess a golden retriever. Not too big, not too small, just the right size - handsome and muscular, without being too bulky. And I'm always happy and always smiling.

Hey Laura, why do you ask these silly beastiality-related questions? I like Dan's answer, but you must know already that few people answer this well. Time to retire it. You can ask this instead: Beatles or Stones? I think you can figure out everything you need to know about someone from that question. Important, never pair people who disagree.
(I'm just being silly, you know. But, do indeed retire the beastiality question)

Anyway, Dan's a pretty solid guy. There isn't a lot of detail in the profile, though, that makes him look suitable for Martha. I think Eric, by virtue of being more creative, looks like Martha's type. 60% of the pollsters agree.

That's all for this week. Welcome to the party, Laura Vogel! I hope our little hazing exercise didn't hurt you too much! Just be prepared for some more of it here at the Lectern, from now through the indefinite future! Heh heh heh!

New York Times Modern Love: My Two Dads

2005-09-13T07:52:00.000-07:00

(note: I'm in a terrible rush while writing this, so pardon if it comes out looking like something other than English)
Having a column that relies entirely on random freelancers (usually describing their own love lives) entails a hit-and-miss pattern of literary quality. Accordingly, we've endured some stinkbombs in the past month or two, yet this week we get paid off with a truly exceptional and emotional essay about an adoption, a flawed adult, a growing child, and a concerned and caring observer.

This week, our writer is Dan Savage, best known as the author of Savage Love (a syndicated column that runs locally in the Village Voice) and a truly talented and professional author. This is not the usual "good pitch turned into a bad piece" Modern Love essay; Savage is one of the best we have when it comes to breaking down emotions and composing reactions for everyday life situations involving romance, love and loss. His talents clearly show in this week's essay about his experience with an open adoption and its aftermath.

The short story is that Savage and his partner (Dan bats for the other team, if you know what I mean) adopted a newborn baby from a homeless girl, and the situation devolves as the homeless girl grows to be a highly unreliable and deeply troubled woman. Savage laments that his adopted child's mother cannot fix her problems, and ends up contemplating (in a regretful way) that perhaps it's best for this woeful tale to end, either for best or for worst.

Along the way, there is deep heartbreak, difficult explanations to an innocent child, and much-needed rescues for both the mother and her companion pet (apparently a necessity for the young mother, described as "petite" by Savage). There is no happy ending here, and the whole situation is truly heart-wrenching.

All of the blame for the problems here can be squarely laid on the mother's shoulders. She is completely irresponsible and unnecessarily stubborn. There is absolutely no need for her to be in a troubled situation, to be a drug-addled vagrant with many problems and no solutions. I would go as far as to call her mentally ill.

Savage is exceedingly sympathetic and tolerant when describing the mother of his adopted son, and is also unselfish in providing assistance during emergencies. DJ's new "alternative lifestyle" parents are nothing short of God-like when coming to the rescue, able to solve the toughest problems (including bail money) and address the toughest issues (example: when should they tell DJ that his mother is seemingly dead). The silver lining of this story is that DJ is in the best possible care, and will surely avoid his mother's fate.

The essay ends on a terribly dark note - Savage painfully stops an inch short of saying, "If she cannot clean herself up, she's better off dead." Yikes! I can't criticize that emotion, as Savage is hoping for euthanasia rather than trying to rid himself of a pest. He has his priorities aligned perfectly, and his priorities lie with his son and family. He regrets that his son's biological mother cannot meaningfully or productively participate in family life, but it is too painful for him to watch her destroy herself from afar, repeatedly. And I agree with his sentiments, as it is too painful for us, the readers, as well.

I think this essay serves the column's subject well. As a fresh take on contemporary relationships, this essay provides an optimistic look at families with homosexual partners (which, in our current national social climate, deserves all the positive attention it can get) while providing a view on several difficult contemporary family and lifestyle issues (namely, adoptions, vagrancy, drug abuse, and perhaps mental illness). It's tough to provide love and care to someone who makes irrational decisions. It's terribly difficult to deal with poverty, homelessness, and drug abuse issues in a modern family. Adoptions, and the attachment and authority issues that come with it, have always been tricky. Homosexual couplings are a hot-button topic among political leaders and media pundits right now, stirring controversy among people of all kinds of morals and political alingments. It's all very modern and topical, which made this essay a slam-dunk choice for this ongoing Modern Love column.

But, in the end, I suppose the most important bonds of love here are the bonds among DJ, Dan and his partner - the results of quality parenting. I don't think we have enough of that in this country lately. I think that's the desired result here, although I truly regret that it began with taking a child out of a sobbing teenage mother's arms.

(Times editors: consider this a thank-you note)

New York Post Meet Market: Have A Drink On Me

2005-09-06T13:17:00.000-07:00

A little bit of update on Meet Market: we're losing Mackenzie Dawson Parks, International Woman of Mystery, to another section of the New York Post. And I'm ever so sorry to see her go! After all, her efforts at matching daters have been largely responsible for turning around the direction of this column from disappointing to hopeful. Yeah, I think Tom helped too. But Mackenzie should get a lot of the credit. What will we do without her?

(ummm, keep wisecracking, that's what)

Amanda, who I reluctantly jilted in favor of Shevi, winds up having a lovely time with Roberto instead. Well, that's rather nice, isn't it?

Amanda: We talked about how we'd gotten involved in the Meet Market column, and we were relieved to discover that we had both fallen into it almost accidentally.

You mean having been sniped off of Friendster by Mackenzie? I told you all, we're going to miss her very much!

What can I say otherwise about the date? Well, Roberto seemed to be pretty laid-back and conventional, so my concerns from last week were completely eliminated. Amanda was pleasant and polite as expected, and as a result they meshed fairly well. They even managed to overcome the fact that she's a few inches taller than him, which is impressive considering how many people would immediately consider that to be a deal-breaker. That all said, they didn't really show any true sparks in their post-date writeups, so all I can summarize from this is that they'd probably make pretty good pals for the future. That might not be the ultimate romantic victory, but it counts as a win for the Post.

This week's date chooser is Chris. How would you describe yourself, Chris?

"unfathomably wealthy and good-looking."

I know that's just a joke, but seriously. That sort of joke is not funny when you're wearing a horizontal striped shirt where the center stripe significantly sags on the sides. At the very least, he's a fashion disaster. You should have rocked out with the black cocktail suit and the light pink dress shirt, collar open. That's what all the handsome guys are wearing.

(hahah, yeah right - more like "goofy looking" guys. Maybe I'll wear something different the next time. Like a paper bag over my head.)

All sartorial concerns aside, Chris looks a bit like a hipster, but without the asshole qualities. Maybe it's because he's creative, but grounded. That's a good start for us - who can we pair him with?

Sheela's our first choice. She likes wine, it comes up twice in her profile. That makes me verrrrry cautious. But she seems pretty harmless otherwise - she enjoys dining, walking, tennis, dancing, etc. There isn't a very strong profile here, but her bacchinalian tastes are her only true weakness. She's in the hunt.

Next, we have Denise. Bars and tequila come up as two separate answers here, which begs the question: how did they manage to pair a seemingly non-alcoholic guy with a couple of imbibing females? It's usually the guys who do the drinking. Baffling. Anyway... she's pretty normal, but not a standout candidate. I'd say Sheela and Denise are running pretty even right now.

Finally, we have Anna, who's getting a second chance in the choosing pool after she was first shown to me. She certainly had some popularity among my associates when I was making my choice (again, the choice was made long before anyone knew who I had to choose from), so that's a plus for her. Then again, it seems like her profile was better the last time - and now, all of a sudden, she's talking about happy hour. Wha? Can we get away from the booze for a second, ladies? Chris never said anything about bars, tequila, or happy hours. I wonder where this trend is coming from...

In the end, all the girls are pretty nice, but none of them stand out from one another. I really can't decide on any of them, but since I want only the best for the girls I had to choose from, I suppose we could pick Anna this week for Chris, and then let the other two reappear to pick some guys of their own (as the tradition seems to be around here). Anna's leading the polls, so I suppose that's not a bad strategy. Of course, this has no bearing on Chris' choice, so we'll just find out next week how his own strategy fared...

New York Times Modern Love: I love you, and you, and you, and...

2005-09-06T12:40:00.000-07:00

Stephen Elliot did not care that we were all on vacation this weekend, and decides to print a piece on a polyamorous relationship that requires a bit of overtime thinking just to get through to the end. The plot is simple: Stephen loves Angelina, but she's involved with another man as well, and married to yet another. With children. Maybe the relationship itself is complicated, but the whole piece boils down to Mr. Elliot's need to share his feelings on the situation.

Is there a moral to the story? Of course not. The article isn't even ended properly, because there's zero resolution. It seems the Times has devolved to printing stuff worthy of blog posts. Perhaps next week we'll see someone talking about how they love their cat. Modern Love indeed.

What bugs me the most about this week's story is that, although I should probably be appreciative of new perspectives on love and relationships, this article completely wastes my time by trying to present this concept as if it were actually practicable. This type of relationship is completely unconventional, and Mr. Elliot's reaction is very demonstrative of why it's a far-from-ideal relationship setup (to the extent that people usually give up and don't even bother to try in these circumstances). Because it's so tricky, and perhaps futile, to share intimate relations with multiple people while evading feelings of jealousy and abandonment, polyamourous relations are avoided by the general public. For all practical purposes, they're non-existent in the general population (unless someone's trying to pull it off on the sneak). In the end, this piece is either a personal essay with no basis in reality, or a fiction without a real plot. Either way, I'd have rather played Sudoku than spent 10 minutes trying to slog through this piece.

And, as the icing on the cake, Mr. Elliot displays an obvious and worrisome emotional fragility that makes his viewpoint on the matter all but invalid. He's the archetypal "unreliable narrator" because of lines like this:

I was inches away from crying. I pushed my face into her collar, gripped her tightly.

Ummmmm, yeah, every guy feels that way when they're (apparently) waiting for someone to find parking. One time, in Midtown, I needed Xanax while a friend tried to find a metered space big enough for an SUV on a Saturday afternoon.

His feelings are obviously deranged (but I mean that in the nicest possible way), so why should we trust his hope above our own doubts? He certainly failed to earn my trust as a reader. Although I admit to being deeply cynical and therefore unreliable myself, the one thing that has me thinking the most about this piece is just how many thoughtful readers did, in the end, trust Mr. Elliot to have rational expectations for this unconventional relationship.

Did I forget to mention that the rationale between Mr. Elliot's attempts to find understanding in others' feelings is primarily driven by his own needs for emotional support? That's never happened in this column before! *shock*

New York Post Meet Market: Like To Exercise? These Guys Will Give You A Good Sprint

2005-08-30T12:23:00.000-07:00

The Best Dating Column in New York.
(because both the Daily News and the New York Times don't have one! hahahaha!)

(FYI - Mr. Murdoch, you'll owe me a commission if you use that as a tagline.)

I have to eat my words from last week, as I predicted that Boris and Michelle would mix like pig and elephant DNA. Well, it seems that Boris was just being self-deprecating when he said that he cannot ably smalltalk, as Michelle says:

Michelle: We talked for so long that the restaurant started to close.

Arrgh! I fucked up. Boris is not death warmed over. He's actually quite lively and entertaining - and entertainable:

Boris: When we left, I offered to go for a walk, not wanting our date to end. To my pleasure, she suggested that we stop by a karaoke bar-another "first" for me. Afterward, I walked her home and we talked for an hour before she went up.

Well, I'm just happy that it worked out after all. I'll accept being wrong if it means others are finding romance.

One thing I wasn't wrong about, though, was the resemblance to Finch from American Pie:

Boris: Our goodbye was physically indeterminate. First-date semantics are uncomfortable to me. What's expected can never be as exciting as the unknown.

I've read clinical papers about pus formations that were more romantic than that quote.

Moving along - Amanda is our date chooser for next week. She is certainly familiar around these parts - she was one of my potential choices for my date courtesy of the Post! I think she's a fine choice for a date (although I had a great time with Shevi, the initial choice I had was VERY difficult to make), and I'm glad to see her reappear here. I have not a single concern about her ability to be a lovely companion for a romantic evening.

That said, the types of guys that are going to work best for her are the ones who have the most in common with her interests. She's young and she likes to have fun. She more than likely spends a lot of social time at bars and clubs. She would do best with a guy who isn't too stuffy, boring, or pig-headed. Will that be a tall task with our selections? We'll find out...

Roberto is a bartender who's trying to be an actor. He pirates movies from China. He practices yoga. He can tell you the time of day... without a watch!

What are three things you cannot live without? Acai berries, a double-hinged wine key and Istara cheese.

I've honestly never heard of any of these things. To sum it up:

I make almost no sense at all.

Agreed.

At least Roberto fesses up to having a side job, though. Jake wears his "actor/writer" profession with a straight face! Do you think Jake has the chops to work full time in the entertainment field? Let's grab some quotables to get a better idea:

What's sexy? ... A girl who not only holds up her end of the conversation, but can also throw in some great stories is well on her way to becoming a sexy beast.

How would you describe yourself? I am a damn fine individual.

Hooray for the not-quite-starving artist.

I'm also not bad looking. Sauce.

...no screamings, beatings or stabbings.

Folks, we have tight competition for the Freak Award here. Let's keep going.

Our last choice is Joshua. And... he's a nanny. I've heard of male nurses, but male nannies? Well, maybe there's some precedent.

What does your lucky underwear look like? I don't wear underwear. Really, I don't. But, if I did, it would have bunnies all over them.

I just don't know what to say now. Except this: Amanda is screwed.

All three of these guys are exceedingly quirky yet rather genial-looking, so it's hard to get an idea of who is really best for Amanda. In the end, based on profession and profile, it looks like Jake's the guy who uses his sense of humor in his profession best, and that probably makes him richer than the other guys. Since most of you readers are heading out to the Hamptons this weekend, you know that's of highest importance. So Jake it is.

Enjoy the holiday weekend, and we'll be back next week to see, after all that time at the gym doing cardio, how fast Amanda can run.

New York Times Modern Love: Bad "Pick-Up" Lines

2005-08-30T11:38:00.000-07:00

I've been hitching since its heyday when I was a teenager... and I've made it to middle age without any traumatic experience of hitchhiking that would alter my behavior.

That's the nut of Jessica Krasilovsky's ode to hitchhiking. This deconstruction will be brief, as the essay fits in two easy parts, neither of which contains much in the way of useful romantic substance beyond your typical Readers' Digest essay.

(That's probably the worst insult I've ever dropped on anyone here at The Lectern. And that's saying something.)

The first half of the essay is a collection of musings about the social aspects of hitchhiking. I'd love to have a discussion about this, but we're supposed to be talking about love/dating here and there's hardly a whiff of it in this section of the essay. This would have been great for the "Lives" column in the Magazine, and I'm almost positive that this essay would have been submitted for that column on a secondary basis (if it wasn't the primary target for this essay from the beginning).

The second half is a description of a stronger personal relationship than anything described previously. Some unnamed, grey-haired, Richard Gere look-alike with a permanently raised arm is the target of affection. (No hamster jokes here.) Jessica describes how she meets him, talks with him, deconstructs him, spends some quality time with him... and then leaves to go back to her life in NYC. Oh, how nice. It's love as a transient emotion, which is seemingly justified in the context of adventure.

Love is not a transient emotion, though, and only people who watch Hollywood westerns would buy into the concept that there is enough honor in being adventurous to overcome the weakness of being noncommittal. Jessica accepts abandoning established acquaintances as a necessary condition of meeting new people. Or, maybe she keeps her distance and likes it that way, and we're supposed to accept that because she's a free bird. Whether or not you, as a reader, agree that this is any way to live or conduct your personal relationships, I simply note that there are ethical concerns when it comes to plumbing people's emotions for your own fascination when you cannot or will not reciprocate. I assume that she does not have much to say to others before she leaves, because she said not much about herself in this essay before she left us, either.

Actually, that's a good thing. She presents the first Modern Love essay in a while where the author was merely an observer and not the masked, self-obsessed subject. And, as much as I disagree with her transient approach to bonding with others, she does make earnest attempts to understand the people with whom she interacts. That's a departure for this column, and I suppose it's a welcome one. It didn't come without compromise, but then again, compromise is often a condition of Modern Love...

New York Post Meet Market: When You're Smiling... Keep On Smiling... The Whole World Smiles With You...

2005-08-23T08:06:00.000-07:00

It's Sunday, which means it's time for Meet Market to catch up on last week's daters

And now it's Tuesday, which means I have to check in on this clown show and see if Tom and Mackenzie, International Woman of Mystery, are doing their job and slinging a few of Cupid's arrows out into the dating pool - rather than the daggers that most people would rather throw at each other. Isn't romance lovely?

It seems that Mr. Pouty Face Steve got a bad rap last week, because he has a much better demeanor than I attributed to him. He chose Eve and had a wonderful time with her. All the more that it was a mistake to have a flat expression for his dater photo. It's okay to look bored if you live your life bored; at least that's truthful. It's unfortunate, though, if you enjoy the company of others but cannot convey that in your dating profile.

People, if you spend more than 10 minutes putting together your resume, you should put at least that much time preparing your materials for your dating profile! That's the other half of your life, after all! And if I've said that before, it's worth repeating.

Anyway, quotables:

Steve: When Eve walked in, my first thought was that her photo didn't do her justice.

Well, at least that first date was good, Steve. Because Eve's going to think twice about a second one after that remark. I know it was meant to be a compliment, but it never comes out that way. Ever.
(I myself have been tripped up over this - just not publicly in the New York Post, which makes it worse!)

Eve: I was very relieved when I saw a handsome man waiting for me, and knew I could ditch my escape plan.

Escape plan! I love it! I envision rescue helicopters with rope ladders swooping in to take Eve away if Steve even does so much as pick his nose! Of course, we've seen what happens when you have a poorly formed escape plan, so I prefer a prepared approach to a hasty exit.

In any case, they like each other. Score one for the Post. Yay!

Our next dater - made from 100% Recycled dating pool stock - is Boris, who was the other guy who lost out to King Worst Matt for the chance to date Queen Worst Liberal Leslie. I think Boris reads The Lectern, because he's seemed to have taken my advice:

Ahhh, poor Boris. Fix up the profile and you'll be a winner, trust me.

Well, his profile is a lot better now, so I guess he's ready for action.

(I didn't get a chance to somehow work in the joke about Boris looking like a cross between Dracula and Finch from American Pie. Sorry readers, I'm not my sharpest this week. I promise I'll do better in the future.)

Our first potential match for Boris is Michelle, standing in the attractive hands-on-hips pose that Jen Dziura so skillfully mocked when she guest-authored.

I've been known to order mojitos, caipirinhas and lychee martinis in certain settings.

I guess she doesn't hang out at Hogs and Heifers, eh?

Your ideal date? A fantastic dinner followed by a fantastic concert. You saw that one coming, didn't you? I'm a simple girl.

Minor qualm: how simple is it to set up a fantastic dinner with fantastic concert seats? Not simple at all. You can't even figure out the Ticketmaster convenience charges without having your CPA on-hand. But I do get the message. She likes the usual activities. (She mentioned karaoke earlier, too.) She'd do well with a light-hearted and compassionate guy. I think Boris is a little too heavy for Michelle, which is unfortunate because they both look like nice people. Next please.

Rebecca is our second choice and is a teacher like Boris. Seems like a good start.

What do you like to do when you're not working? I have a lot of answers to this - reading heavy books like Proust or Tolstoy, grilling swordfish or roasting vegetables, seeing movies at BAM or hanging out in Prospect Park with a picnic; hatching incredible plans in the living room with some friends and a few drinks.

You know what? She looks great for Boris. She's a nice woman and seems to be balanced quite well to fit with his demeanor. Oooh, I'm excited!

Our final choice is Sabre, an attorney. No relation to Sabre from American Gladiators.

How would you describe yourself? I am warm, funny, interesting and intelligent.

I'm waiting for the day when I see someone answer this with the words "cold bitch." I will likely need to clean up a lot of coffee off the wall in the back of my computer monitor if that ever happens.

I can charm the pants off of anyone!

Such modesty. But you know you won't be wearing pants at the end of the night, so it all works out. Sabre's not a bad girl to have around, but she can't win this contest:

If we were to ask your best friend about what kind of person they'd like to see you end up with, what would they say? A smart, funny intellectual; a guy who enjoys the nightlife and is always up for an adventure. Someone who has an open mind and something interesting to say.

Bad match for Boris, who is bad at smalltalk. Sometimes a match between two good people just cannot work. Sorry, Sabre.

The easy pick is Rebecca. Everything's looking rosy for her and Boris to go out and have a lovely time together, and perhaps spark some romance along the way. The polls are going with Michelle, which is a nice vote of confidence for her, but I explained above why that ultimately wouldn't work out. Also, most of the pollsters haven't been analyzing this column for a year. I have. Who would you rather listen to? (I thought so.)

New York Times Modern Love: Where There's Smoke, There's Fire

2005-08-22T08:53:00.000-07:00

"I'd never date a smoker," she said, "much less marry one."

And off we go on a rolling start to Hyla Sabesin Finn's piece on being married to a smoker. You might wonder how a writer could squeeze 1700 words out of this particular topic, but in the end it's an easy narrative: her husband lies as often as he lights up, apparently.

It would have been folly for Hyla to try to enumerate each instance of a falsehood or broken promise on behalf of Larry, but I counted in this essay no less than eight egregious incidents where Larry did not keep his word. Most men don't get past three. The ones that do tend to go on forever lying, which is why it's remarkable that the essay ends with him finally living up to his commitments.

Then again, these aren't ordinary lies. He's just trying to kick a bad habit, and earnestly. Which begs the question, why is Hyla so dramatic about it? She essentially asks the same thing herself:

The truth is that Larry was completely supportive. When I wanted to move closer to my parents, he agreed. When I wanted to start a business, he said, "Go for it." And what about those extra 19 pounds back when I had them? He never noticed. Why couldn't I accept him as he accepted me, flaws and all?

The confict here is that Hyla herself knows that she's nitpicking - that perhaps she's making a mountain out of a molehill. After all, although smoking can be an obnoxious habit, Larry is generally on his best behavior. Sure, it would be preferrable for him to quit entirely, but as the essay goes on you wonder how Larry's sneaking around has any impact on Hyla other than on her own neurosis.

The funny thing about the end of the essay is that Hyla quits herself ("the nagging", she states) but in the end no longer has this nag to drag around, as Larry finally quit smoking successfully. Do we get to judge Hyla, now, for keeping her own promise? Of course not; she's the author! She's not going to admit that nagging itself was so addictive that now, perhaps, she's moved onto Larry's inside-out socks in the laundry as her new nag target. Maybe Larry can provide a rebuttal in a future column! "I stopped smoking, she didn't stop complaining."

(Larry, that's what happens when you chase underage tail in college. You get a nag. Meat Loaf wrote a song about it. It's cheesy, but true.)

Moving away from these two individuals, this essay is framed by a larger discussion about the role of smoking in relationships and society. It is depicted as a social scourge, which is only half the story. What Hyla won't tell you - actually, she scorns the concept when she catches Larry "huddling pathetically with a puffing posse" - is that smoking is considered a social habit by those who partake in it. Now that society at large has scorned smoking as a disgusting and intolerable habit, smokers bond even more tightly together over their shared indulgence while the rest of society struggles with detachment problems. For every girl like Hyla who is grossed out by guys smoking outside the bar, there's another pack-a-day girl who's looking to talk to cute guys in the smoking circle. It's not a valid reason to deteriorate your own health, but it certainly invalidates the argument that smoking is truly unacceptable behavior. Only some people find it that repulsive.

Although our author is conflicted, it's merely because she ponders her inability to compromise as the counterpoint to her disgust of the habit itself. So, here we have another self-aggrandizing tale where the author never takes a step back to try to reach an understanding of another person's approach to life and relationships. In the scope of this essay, Hyla's obsession with Larry's smoking eventually overreaches any pragmatic issues that might come of his habit. Had she been less stubborn and closed-minded, Larry wouldn't have needed to break promises - and, with better support from Hyla, he might have successfully quit earlier, too.

Ah well, par for the course.

New York Post Meet Market: Would It Kill You To Smile?

2005-08-16T08:35:00.000-07:00

We're back to the normal routine with Meet Market this week: I'm not in the column anymore, there are no guest bloggers, the date setup was unsucessful, and next week's doesn't look so good either. Ahhh, this state of affairs is like an old pair of slippers... so familiar, so comfortable...

Jannie wisely chose Igwe for her date, as he was pretty much the best of the bunch in terms of romantic potential. The crowd didn't see it that way (70% for Tyrone), but if anyone knew anything at all about dating, we'd all be married already.

Unwisely, Jannie wasn't so enthusiastic about Igwe:

I have to say that I don't think there was really any major spark between us - just good conversation. Also, I don't know if I am ready to take the plunge into a new relationship, as I am starting school in September.

Arrgh! And to make things worse, Igwe was mostly enthusiastic:

She is pretty close to the total package.

In the end, though, I think this is for the best. Igwe himself really isn't the total package, and neither is Jannie. Our unintentionally hilarious quote of the week shows why:

One issue I had with Jannie was that she didn't seem very politically aware, which is a sticking point with me. I told her that I was a communist and she didn't really know what that was.

Communist! You red-faced no-good Yakov-Smirnoff-loving traitor! I thought Rocky Balboa got rid of you guys in the 80's! Is it not enough to be a Democrat liberal anymore? Even funnier, she had no idea what he's talking about. I mean, she's only 22, but how does she not know? They were pointing nukes at us for only about... um, 40 years! Back to grade-school history class for you, young Jannie!

Our picker for next week is Steve, who's been seen around these parts before, and has even been recommended (to date Queen Worst Liberal Leslie - I guess it's good he got passed over for that one). Even though I've recommended him in the past, I've changed my mind. Here's the reason: see that picture in his profile? He's not smiling. I can tell you firsthand, they ask you to smile when they take those pictures. The fact that he's wearing a bored look on his face - combined with a couple of his profile answers that reveal his hipster entertainment tastes - makes me think that he's not a warm, down-to-earth person. He's matchable, certainly, but I wouldn't set up any of my female friends with Mr. Pouty Face.

Of our potential daters, here's the breakdown:
* Samantha is a very emotional and down-to-earth person. Magic 8 Ball: Outlook not so good.
* Eve is a Red Sox fan. Forget it! They're even worse than Communists!
* Becky has hipster-ish tastes. And she's the last one in the room. (For guys, that's a perfect reason to get romantic with someone)

So, Becky it is! And the polls agree, she's winning with a nearly 47% plurality victory as of Tuesday. And I sincerely hope that Mr. Pouty Face agrees.

Signing out!

New York Times Modern Love: The Upcoming Major Motion Picture Starring Kate Hudson and Josh Duhamel

2005-08-15T11:05:00.000-07:00

This week's Modern Love is a rare treat - a story that involves failed love, a meddlesome author, and a happy ending. I'm going to make sure the world knows right now: at 3:15 on August 13, 2005, I predicted that this essay would get made into a chick-flick. It's too perfect not to be. It is hopelessly romantic to the 10th power.

I commend the author, Kirsten Allen Major, for writing an essay notable for the fact that, like a few other rare Modern Love essays, this story is not at all about her. Certainly, she had the chance to break out her own feelings on romance beyond three paragraphs, but instead she decides to play the role of hopeful and helpful bystander, hardly innocent but certainly well-intentioned.

...or maybe not. Good intentions are sometimes soured with selfish motives and self-importance. In the major twist that drives the main plot to its resolution, she takes a foolhardy chance in trying to establish a love connection that had failed to sustain itself organically. It's evident she decided to do this because she was completely sure that she was right. Oh, what blind arrogance! While she gets to be the hero of our happy ending, she also had felt the kickback from her own hubris right as her friend Krista discovers Kirsten's own trickery:

The lunacy of what I'd done suddenly descended upon me. I had not liberated love; I'd created a new opportunity for her to suffer. Who does something like this? I wasn't a saint; I was insane.

So do we forgive her for being sinuous merely because everything worked out in the end? Of course! I don't have the time to hold grudges on Sundays! All is good, Kirsten. You will be played by a major Hollywood star someday!

As for the relationship itself... well, one thing's for sure: Marcus has commitment issues. You think? Two broken engagements with the same girl, and he's lucky to still have both his testicles. Ahh, but Krista's so nice and gentle:

...she was a serious Christian to my skittish heathen, with a mother who expressed hopes that she find "a nice Christian boy"... soon I found myself liking her: she was intelligent, vulnerable and kind.

Therefore, we can expect her to be a good sport about repeatedly getting screwed over in the romance department. (What excellent character development! Love this script, baby! Have my people call your people, we'll do lunch!)

The story is actually rather thin: Krista's afraid to talk to Marcus, her true love. Kirsten gets involved and tells Marcus how Krista really feels. (Krista, Kirsten, Krista, Kirsten, Krista, Kirsten... I'm dizzy.) Krista finds out, somehow doesn't go berserk. Marcus finally finds Krista, they get married, we never find out if Kirsten gets any quality ass in the meantime, the end. There's some good framing and fleshing, though. For example, Krista tries dating another guy, but it doesn't work. Kirsten finds enough detail to keep the story moving along without becoming inane or moving off-topic, as some of the authors in this column have done before.

It's a great story, solidly written, with no truly egomaniacal streaks in the narration, and it even has the ending scene written cleanly and concisely:

Their wedding took place several months later and I wept through the entire ceremony.

Two thumbs up!

New York Post Meet Market: If You Obsessively Read Meet Market For A Year, Your Dates Will Be Great, Too!

2005-08-09T09:57:00.000-07:00

So, how the hell did my date turn out?

Once again we turn to the always hilarious, side-splitting, guffaw-inducing Jen Dziura. Seriously, she's funny. Real funny.
(have you guessed yet that I'm about to publish something that hits a little close to home? Well, that was sort of the point of this exercise anyway. Well that, and to convince my extended family that I do indeed date women, just infrequently.)

Anyway, all opinions to follow belong to Jen and not myself. You might find them funny. I didn't!

This week's Post dating roundup reads like the "What I Did Last Summer" essay I wrote in Mrs. Everhart's third-grade class, which I have taken the liberty to include for you here:

I like my grandma. She is nice. I visited her. That is in Ohio. It was hot. But fun. We ate pie.
- Jenny Dziura

One might attribute the milquetoast blandness of this column to the fact of this being the most over-documented date in the history of dating. For the date, Brian chose 28 year old editor Shevi, also my suggestion from my review last week here on the Lectern. So far, so good -- until Shevi realized, as she undoubtedly did at some point in the evening, that this was a "date" on which the Post was trying to impress Brian, all while Brian was trying to impress his readers, and that she had essentially walked into someone else's sick media clusterfuck.

The column begins:

"USUALLY, we don't get nervous before we send our couples out on a date - but this time we did. You see, Brian, last week's bachelor, writes a blog devoted to analyzing The New York Post's fabulous Meet Market column. It was like we were being rated!"

It is unclear whether the "fabulous" is the Meet Market column's own impression of itself, or whether this view has been attributed to Brian's blog via the mere existence of Brian's blog, rather than any explicit statement of fabulousness therein.

Shevi's review follows. "I got to Paris Match first. It is a small, candlelit, wood-paneled bistro with an atmosphere as flowing as the Seine."

"An atmosphere as flowing as the Seine." Can you imagine dating this girl? Dear Brian, I cannot see you anymore. Though our love has been bountiful like the Mekong in monsoon season, our future is waning like a Gibbous moon.

She continues, guardedly: "Within seconds, we started talking about Brian's blog. As dinner progressed, we talked about our jobs and aspirations, and places we'd traveled." She ends "I really enjoyed meeting Brian and sharing a summer evening of excellent conversation and food with him."

Uh-huh. This is why reality television shows contractually obligate people to get into hot tubs together.

It seems a bother to even quote Brian here, since his account of this date is clearly crafted to win the favor of the readership on this blog, and is also lacking in hot-tubbing: "Shevi is a very attractive lady, and was graceful throughout the evening.... She showed a genuine interest in my conversation points, and she spoke with confidence and clarity when I asked her questions about her background and interests.... I'd absolutely take Shevi out on a future date, romantic or casual."

These reviews contain all the personality and verve of a thank you note I'd write to an elderly relative for sending me a small appliance on my birthday.

The only sensible conclusion to draw from these mutually bland reviews is that our daters, in the face of media scrutiny, spent their date developing a strategy of calculated misinformation, hastily scribbled these reviews (each approved by the other) on wine lists stolen from Paris Match, and went home together, happy to live in a world in which "shared a cab to the West Side and then exchanged contact information" can also mean "hit it from the back all night long."

Or else these are two really, really boring people.

Your call.

I'm appalled! First, it's a family paper, they had to leave out the stuff about the agressive footsie and the body shots. Second, you totally forgot to make fun of me for looking like a 16-year-old in this week's picture. You dropped the ball on that one!

Okay, it's not true that there was any footsie or body shots. We just talked. Nothing happened afterward. And you know what? That was by design. My idea of a romantic evening doesn't include a sloppy, forced hookup in the back of a cab after dessert while there's still creme brulee smeared on our cheeks. No, I just wanted to play it cool and gentlemanly. And it worked. I liked her, she liked me, we gave each other four hearts for a total of eight hearts altogether. Why ya gotta hate?

Plus, if you haven't looked, a whopping 96.1% of voters say we should go out on another date! And no, that's not a result of my mom rigging the poll.

Shevi - nice work. Jen - bite me.

Moving back into the normal routine, this week's featured dater is Jannie, who... well, let's have Mackenzie, International Woman of Mystery*, do the description for us:

...a beautiful nursing student who enjoys photography, operatic singing, and cooking soul food.
...likes to go to lounges, spas and comedy shows - and sing in her church choir.
...describes herself as "a high-energy person that loves to laugh, love and eat."
...prefers belly dancing and vinyasa yoga to keep herself in shape.
...(thinks that) sexy is a man with tattoos, "one or two are a plus," and someone who "has an effortless beauty, with classic style and a humanitarian spirit."

In essence, she's a nice girl who is talented, pretty, and limber. She also has an edge, but it's adventurous-edgy. (not slutty-edgy) I think she's fantastic. Are any of her three male choices just as spectacular?

First, we have Igwe. He's nice. Not a lot of room for humor or criticism here. I suppose that's a good thing. He's a poet/writer; keep that in mind, because it makes him creative but it also means he makes a peanut salary unless he's a best-seller. Quotables:

What do you think of the New York dating scene? There are a lot of silly, silly girls. I don't mind, I have a good sense of humor; but it's hard to take them seriously.

Silly? Maybe. Sounds like a mild euphemism for "evil". Um, Sam, what do you think?

I'll never forgive you! How do you live with yourself?! You never loved me! You used me! I hope you slide under a gas truck and taste your own blood! Why didn't you tell me you were a demon from Hell?!!!! You deserve the men you're gonna meet, you loser! Railroad bums! Transients! Out-of work guys! Guys who're gonna use you like you used me! Guys who are gonna take money out of your purse and crawl out a window! OH! OOHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!

Yeah, dating in New York is kinda tough for some people. But not for Igwe, which makes him a strong contender.

Next, we have Tyrone. He looks like a pretty big guy, and with a title like "Marketing Vice President", he's probably got a big bank account too. But is he as nice and polished as Igwe?

We're buying. What are you drinking? Jack and Coke is the first, second and third drink of choice.

Dating profile lesson: 90% of us in New York may love a good night on the town, but this is the last place that you want to brag about your drinking habits. This line should have been snipped at "Jack and Coke". That said, it's the only thing I can find wrong with his profile. He looks like a great guy. But I'm still leaning toward Igwe.

Finally, we have Ronald, a "retail professional". One thing I watch out for in these profiles is when someone uses an obvious euphemism for their current job titles because they don't want to say something like "cashier" or "photocopier salesman". As much as I admire the attempt to try to pretty up his job title, we can tell he's bullshitting. Bad start. And then there's this:

What do you think of the New York dating scene? I think it is at an all-time low. We are in a confused world right now. Today's woman is nowhere near the woman of yesteryear.

Sounds depressing and pessimistic. And, because all of these guys have pretty decent profiles, it comes down to the little things. Where Ronald is pessimistic, Igwe is carefree. That counts for something. So Ronald is out.

Well, it's down to Tyrone and Igwe, because they both have pretty strong profiles. You think I'm going to choose Igwe, right? Yeah, I am. All other things equal (and positive), Igwe is creative and Tyrone is business-like. Creative is more romantic.

But wait! Tyrone is leading the polls with 70% of the vote! He's got a lead of over 50 points on Igwe? How can this be? Well, for one thing, Tyrone makes good money and hangs at classy places. (I disregarded the name-dropping of all those trendy clubs, obviously the readers didn't.) The other thing might be, and just might be, that Tyrone looks like a big, thick, manly man. Igwe is tall and lanky, and looks like he wouldn't last long in a street fight. These are the sort of things that women say aren't that important, except that womens' actions show that these are the first things they look for. **shrug** Not that it matters; I simply hope for Jannie to make a good choice.

And that's all for now! I'd like to again thank Jen (of jenisfamous.com) for guest blogging and bringing the funny (just kidding about the "bite me" part); Tom and Mackenzie, International Woman of Mystery*, for their hospitality and for having a good sense of humor about this vile, vile blog; and, most of all, I'd like to thank Shevi, who was a delightful companion on our date and didn't judge me for being a juvenile blogger.

Enough sentimentality; come back soon to see who's hooking up, who's hating their dates, and who's having their restaurant cheaply advertised. More fun ahead!

* Mackenzie let me know she prefers that full title over "Mac", which she hates. I will find every excuse in the universe to use it often.

New York Times Modern Love - swf seeks young boys, better therapist

2005-08-08T11:16:00.000-07:00

This week's essay is interesting, to say the least.

Spike Gillespie is a 41-year-old Austin-based woman who claims openly to be "at heart... a guy in my 20's." With a name like Spike Gillespie, I would have thought male African-American jazz trumpeter in his 70's, but no matter - all guys are pretty much the same at heart (they love 19-year-old girls, adore fast cars, and despise newspaper sections that make them look like pansies).

Anyway - Spike has a bit of a weird romantic life, and an equally weird style of writing. The first half or third of the essay - and believe me, I really don't want to take the time to measure this - is a declaration by Spike that she will not make another compromise with any man for the sake of a relationship ever again. She then goes on to essentially insist that she's not a lesbian, and establishes the fact with a series of anecdotes about her romantic failures and creepy tastes. In between, she waxes philosophical and ponders her own mission in life.

Uh, BORING.

We're not done yet, though. She pulls out a Nick-Hornby-style Top 5 list, but decides to stop at 11. I'm going to reprint this list here, with some modifications for generality's sake, so that each of you women can print this out, tape it to your bedroom door, and hope and pray that you find a man that meets all of these criteria who isn't a lead actor in a romantic comedy motion picture:

*Loves me.

*Loves my family.

*Shares my preferences for having children.

*Loves sex.

*Does impressive artistic things.

*Isn't an addict.

*Likes to travel.

Good looking.

*Independent.

Monogamous.

*Funny.

We know for a fact that Spike is at least 9 of those things, and I put an asterisk next to each of them. (Monogamous is not a safe bet; good-looking is a matter of your own personal taste.) So, if a guy matches all 11, he's not far off from Spike. Also, his name is John Cusack.

Following along, there's something about a guy named Southpaw Jones, who apparently becomes her romantic interest but then is not, but then becomes a friend. And yes, I'm just as confused from reading the actual article as you are from reading this description so far.

I'm totally missing the point of this essay, other than perhaps it's a chance for Spike to justify an extended slut-phase in a prestigious newspaper. Hey, you don't get a chance to do that too often!

Okay, perhaps that's a bit mean. Spike is not a slut. Maybe she's a cradle robber, but she's not a slut. She has standards, values, and character. Her romantic decisions are generally well-considered, save for this one:

...all I could do was lube myself up with alcohol and fall into bed with one man or another, all of them terribly wrong.

That's hot.

What was I saying? Oh, yeah, she's definitely not a slut.

What do we take away from this as readers? Well, for one thing, stick to dating people your own age so that when you have a romantic catastrophe or two, you can discuss it with peers without looking like a pedophile or a gold-digger. Second, always write newspaper essays in a "conflict-resolution" form, because "conflict-conflict-conflict-conflict" doesn't work at all. Third, don't burn ex-boyfriends' business cards - shredding will suffice. Fourth, the following description:

I have no real desire to marry. I don't want kids. I dress in jeans and flannels. I ogle beautiful young women. I enjoy takeout. I decorate my house with pieces of paper I find on the ground, and most of my furniture comes from the trash.

... is not very convincing if you're trying to insist you're not a lesbian. And, finally, love comes in all forms, even if you have to order the sex on the side. To go.

Bonus: thanks to the powers of the Internet, I present to you http://www.spikeg.com/. You can't say I never did anything for you.

Watch Out. The Stud Train's A Coming.

2005-08-04T21:04:00.000-07:00

http://icopythat.blogspot.com/2005/08/internet-stud.html

Thanks to the wonders of referrer links, I've found a potential future Post dater who was scouted off of Friendster, caved into the charms of the Post (now with 100% Rupert!), and decided to blog about it. Hmm, Mackenzie's pretty aggressive, isn't she? Well, she's doing her job, and it's been working out pretty well lately I must say. I mean, she found this guy! He's a stud who likes nose studs! He makes fun of the Post! He's listed on "Hot or Not", which is an even bigger throwback than Friendster! I mean, maybe this guy still uses Altavista and rotary phones, too!

I seriously thought that no milestone at the Lectern could top my appearance in the Meet Market column, but now I've actually made fun of a dater before he even appeared in the column. I could quit now while I'm this far ahead.

(no, I'm not quitting! heh.)

Chad's not so bad - he's just a quirky guy who makes harmless ego jokes - but I have a terrible feeling about what he put on his profile. I hope he realized it'd be used in print, unmodified! In any case, we wait with bated breath for the installment that elevates Chad up to the Pantheon of Post Daters.

Also, rembember to look in this Sunday's Post to see who I chose and how my date went!

Oh and Chad, thanks for the link!

New York Post Meet Market: A Babe, A Bore, and A Blogger

2005-08-01T09:42:00.000-07:00

For all the people who tend not to read things that are in print: if you're going to read Meet Market any time in your life, this might be the week to do it. We're peaking, baby. Let's roll:

Leslie chose Matt, but for the love of God I don't know why. She absolutely HATED him. She holds nothing but complete disgust for him, and it's mutual too. People have been buzzing to me all weekend that this date was an absolute trainwreck. Lately I've been pretty high on Tom & Mac, but even they have to be cringing at this setup. I guess my job is to try and figure out what went wrong.

Leslie: "Matt was already at Cascina when I arrived."

Matt: "...she walked in 15 minutes late and didn't excuse herself or even ask me how long I was waiting."

Holy Cupid to hell, this is just a crappy start. I've never seen it this bad before. We continue:

Leslie: "The first thing I noticed was that he was tall; I am not sure if I thought he was good looking."

Ouch! In front of a million people! Why don't you just kick him in the nuts, Leslie?

Matt: "Before long, the photographer showed up to take our picture. Unfortunately the photographer ended up asking me more questions than Leslie did during dinner."

This is a cross between an "all about me" violation and a "boring, disinterested companion" handicap. We'll dock a point from both dater's scorecards on this one just to be fair.

Leslie: "I am a teacher, so I can't say I was thrilled when he announced he is a Bloomberg and Giuliani supporter."

I wholeheartedly support teachers and their mission, no matter who's in office. But, seriously Leslie, who gives a fuck about this crap? Leave the politics at home.

Matt: "There are two times you should never talk about religion or politics; when you're getting a haircut and when you're on a date. But I didn't care, so I decided to ride the sinking ship and brought up Bloomberg. Remember how I thought she was too shy? Well I couldn't be more wrong, because she went on a tirade about how much she disliked the mayor (sorry, Mike!). "

Wait, Leslie, I take that back. He was taunting you. I'm seeing Red Ryan getting displaced here with every passing second.

Leslie: "We did talk about what sort of books we read. He is into some detective fiction writer and my favorite book is, "A Good Man is Hard to Find," so I don't think I will be looking for his recommendations."

This is just cold. Did she feel a need to get snitty about his reading list? It gets better/worse:

Leslie: "He lives on the Upper East Side and has some non-specific corporate job. I can't imagine spending so much of my day doing something boring like that."

Neither can I, but leave the poor guy alone! It's his life! No one's ragged on you for being a teacher, after all. (Note: I double-checked Matt's profile just to make sure he didn't. With these two, never assume anything good.)

Leslie: "We did not give each other any way to contact each other at the end of the date. We said a friendly "See you later", but it was a "not really" one, as well."

Matt: "After a long, uncomfortable walk, we arrived at the station and she finally made a polite gesture by saying she had a great time. I said the same, but the truly great time for me was joining my friends 20 minutes later."

Hahaha! A mutual "See you in hell, asshole!" I'm relieved the date didn't take place at a firing range! Like I've said in the past, that would be the low point in the Meet Market column: dater death.

Anyway, let's commemorate this ugly occasion with a coronation: Matt and Leslie are our new King and Queen Worst Daters! And to celebrate, they'll be leading the homecoming parade in beautiful Carteret, New Jersey this year! Details to come!

Moving on... next week's dater is... uh oh.

Well, I can't write about myself now, can I? Time to introduce our guest blogger for the week, a former Meet Market contestant, the lovely and talented Jen Dziura!
(Note: all opinions to follow are that of the guest blogger, not publisher! But they're still funny!)

This week's Meet Market headline blares "Blogger Brian sks Web Woman." Oh, those clever Post reporters. Is "sks" some kind of trendy lingo from the world wide supernet WiFi highway? Or did the reporter text-message this article in?

And wherever does one find a good "web woman" these days? (Oh, Charlotte, my web woman, spin me a web of the finest spider silk so that I won't be eaten after the county fair. Quoth the web: "Some Dater!")

This half of today's Meet Market review is being brought to you by me instead of Brian, because this week's dater is, of course, Brian himself. "Brian analyzes the Meet Market on his site!" says the caption beneath the photo in which Brian is packed into a suit, twisting his body oh-so-carefully (hips at nine-o-clock, head at twelve-o-clock, try to make palms stop sweating!)
(Ed. note: holy shit, was I a bundle of nerves for that shoot. More on that later. Continuing...)

You can see that the Post is trying to make the best of it. Any PR is good PR, we've heard, but does he have to make fun of our grammar so much? Maybe if we get him laid....

Brian describes himself as "generous, thoughful and romantic." He likes "cycling, jogging and swimming." He cannot live without "breakfast, lunch and dinner." He wants someone who is "confident, fairly intelligent and adventurous." He only likes things that come in threes! How will he ever choose but one woman? He also "volunteers with several organizations." Several, Brian? Did you mean three?

Wait a minute. Let's jump back to "fairly intelligent." Fairly? Fairly intelligent? As in, not too smart, please? I might excuse Brian on the grounds that he didn't want to make anyone feel uncomfortable by setting the bar too high, but he didn't say he wanted someone "fairly confident" or "fairly adventurous." No, no, you must be fully confident about being only "fairly" intelligent. And fully willing to jump from airplanes, apparently, unless "adventurous" is guy-lingo for "bondage sex on the first date." It's hard to tell these days.

On Brian's worst-ever first date, he was dragged into Duane Reade, where his date tried to get him to buy her $40 worth of cosmetics, toiletries, and food.

Brian, that's what you get for picking up homeless teenage runaways on St. Mark's Place.

And now, the three lovely ladies who might have the privilege of paying for their "free" date by being mocked mercilessly here at the Lectern.

Anna, 28, cannot live without her "passport, suitcase, and running shoes." Could be a short date. In any case, she sounds well-prepared to skip town if she finds her underwear choices being dissected on this blog.

Shevi, 28, cannot live without her pen, lip gloss, and email. It seems like if you only get three things, the pen and the email are a bit redundant. Like if your fairy godmother gave you three wishes and you wished for world peace, to be sooo pretty, and an end to war. You just wasted a wish! You could be wiping your ass with $100 bills right now. Anyway, Shevi appears to be the hottest of the bunch.

Amanda, 23, is unemployed. It's too bad that the Meet Market stylebook says to list contestants by their professions, while hiding their more whimsical and personal qualities in the smaller text below. We don't get "Amanda, fun at the beach," or "Amanda, makes a great hummus sandwich," or "Amanda, fairy princess." We get Amanda, Currently job-searching." Poor girl. That being said, if you're unemployed, you don't need to use the phrase "laid-back" three times in a 200 word profile. You don't have a job. We get it!

Shevi (body at nine-o-clock, tilt head towards eleven-thirty!) seems to be the clear winner here. She describes herself as an "artistic, sensitive, thoughtful person" who likes to try new things, enjoys her family, likes spending time with people who enjoy time alone, and a bunch of other really mature stuff that would be boring if she weren't also hot. Plus, lip gloss and mojitos!

Of course, Shevi may well be more than "fairly intelligent," so I don't know where that would leave us.

Check back in here at The Lectern for 'round-the-clock updates on this disaster in the making.

Signing out,
Jennifer Dziura

(Thanks, Jen! And, since the Post shamelessly plugs restaurants in their dating column, we'll do some self-promotion in ours! Check out Jen this Saturday when she performs at the HBO Comedy Showcase at the New York Improv Comedy Club. More details are here! )

Hey, I said "fairly intelligent" because I thought "Mensa-certified" would be reaching. Besides, I keep catching myself saying "Houston St." like the city in Texas, so I have no place in the world to be demanding intelligence! Anyway, check back next week to find out who I chose and how the date went. Watch me burp and eat with my fingers! See the Post sweat out a four-figure meal bill! Laugh as I lose a month's rent to Duane Reade once again! It'll be fantastic! Until next week...

New York Times Modern Love: Gin and Toxic

2005-07-31T13:16:00.000-07:00

This week's Modern Love column is Kevin Callahane's recap on a life rescued from - and saved by - the clutches of alcoholism. While the general topic deals directly with the author's own struggle with a terrible affliction, the heart of this article deals lies in self-discovery, responsibility, and redemption. This contrasts with the finger-pointing, closed-minded judgment, and ignorant self-justification of the most recent columns in this series.

Kevin starts out hitting rock bottom, by being an unreliable person (missing a date) and severely offending - and hurting - someone whom he cares about deeply. In his struggle to try to make up for his failure, he finds both his fatal flaw and his angel. For Julie, the muse for this love letter (or at least that half of this essay), recovers maturely from her own justified anger and reaches out to Kevin:

"You're an alcoholic," she said, not unkindly. "You need help."

Although Kevin was young and wretched at the time, Julie's love overcomes his self-destructive tendencies and leads him on the path to eventual recovery.

Well, that's not literally true. It seems that Julie admired Kevin in some way back then, but it's not entirely clear that she loved him or that she tried really hard to drag him along. Kevin makes it seem that he was infatuated with Julie, and that his somewhat accidental start on the path of recovery was a result of the crush he was keeping inside. Then again, it seems that this was one of the many attempts that Kevin uses to "humanize" himself along the course of this essay, and the frequency in which this is done sends another message entirely. As an unreliable narrator, not to mention a potentially harmful person, Kevin's attempts at "humanizing" himself seem to be exercises in self-deprecation that are literary equivalents of cutting one's self for pleasure. (which, interestingly, also happens physically in the course of the essay) One could conclude, in the end, that Kevin is not nearly as error-prone, hapless, and unguided as he makes himself out to be.

The happy ending is that Kevin recovers from his alcoholism and enters a loving, happy marriage with Julie. (all together now: awwwwwwww!) In what must be listed as a great success in the annals of substance abuse recovery, he confidently expresses that his sobriety is an effortless journey and a welcome part of his life. His final thought, however, is part philosophy and part self-destructive romanticism:

The thing is, would [Julie] and I ever have gotten together if I hadn't been a drowning alcoholic in need of her outstretched hand? Sometimes I can't help but wonder if the burdens we carry don't end up carrying us.

As Kevin feels that his addiction was a necessary part of his life - because for some reason it made sense to him in the past to self-destruct - he tries to use his ends to justify the means, as if this validated all the trouble he went through to get to this point. He doesn't champion alcoholism, but he validates his own demolition. I don't judge him for this, but I would like to take this opportunity to reassure Kevin that, from this essay alone, I believe he is a wonderful and special person who deserves only the good things that he has earned for himself - and none of the bad things that he has wisely left in his past.

The interesting parallels of this essay to the other recent Modern Love essays is that the authors are heavily engaged with themselves, initially there is a romantically glorified target of affection/interest, the author comes to a sad realization, a schism occurs, and ultimately the author is flawed. It's just that in this case, the tables are turned and the author focuses all of the criticism and judgment within, and the author is down-to-earth enough to be cognizant of his own flaws. This is why I appreciate Kevin, and this essay, far better than anything or anyone we've seen in this column over the past three weeks.

Hey, sometimes it's nice to be happy to read these things.

More Meet Market Survivors, And A Brand New Contestant!

2005-07-29T09:18:00.000-07:00

Just to catch up, here's some news about another two daters that have contacted me:

Dena dropped her compliments not long ago, and was pleasant and informative. Her backstory is that she met Mackenzie at a party, and that's how she got involved in the column. Apparently, I was very much keen on the real deal behind her date in my own writeup - spot-on, practically. She mentioned that, even back then in early June, Tom knew about the blog. Veeeerrry interesting. She was flattered by my comments about her in the blog and thanked me for them. I wish to her continuing good luck on the dating scene.

Also, I heard from the lovely and talented Jen Dziura, who was featured in Meet Market just prior to when I started writing about it here. She also paid her compliments and gave me the scoop on one of the column's former writers, Danica Lo. I somewhat knew already that Ms. Lo is a Dartmouth alumni and used her alumni connections quite heavily for her journalistic purposes (both the contest and her other clips for the Post), but here's how deep it got according to Jen:

Later I went to one of the Post's in-person mixers, and it was
basically like an alumni gathering of Dartmouth people, because the
reporter, Danica, had been harvesting all her old college contacts.

Oh my! Not that I have a problem with Dartmouth grads (Ms. Dziura is an alumni herself), but I think this concept is journalistically cringeworthy. It would have been better to do a little more legwork and cast a wider net for sources and contestants, you think?
(Honest clarification: Jen admits that she found more than a few Dartmouth people at the party, but that there defintely were non-Dartmouth people present - as in, "the other, oh, 195 people who didn't go to Dartmouth." So we both regret insinuating that this might have started as the "Meet-Dartmouth Market". That said, this posting on the Dartmouth Alumni Forums indicates that Danica was indeed looking to use her own alumni connections for the dating column, and I couldn't find anything similar at any alumni boards for the other 3,000+ accredited institutions in the United States. I'm not sure what any of this proves, other than that I have way too much time on my hands.)

Anyway, you can find Jen at http://www.jenisfamous.com/, and also at her new blog for the Williamsburg Spelling Bee held at Pete's Candy Store, for which you can find an updated schedule here - drop by sometime. She also performs live comedy, and is a writer and model. Hooray for the uber-talented!

Wait a sec... they have cocktail parties for the former daters? Oh wow. Wouldn't that just be a field day for me? So much to ask about!

Well, if they do have another one, I should be going along, because...

(*drumroll*)

As hinted previously, I will be participating in Meet Market myself! I finally got around to submitting an application - of course, I didn't announce myself in my application as the rogue blogger, but they knew exactly who I was. Luckily, both Mackenzie and Tom have an awesome sense of humor, and thought it'd be great to bring me on board as a single, eager dater willing to take a chance on love. (and putting myself at risk for potential widespread ridicule and embarassment, similar to what I've dished out to so many past daters over the past months)

I will write more details when I'll be allowed to do so - I'm not to leak anything until the story runs in the Post first. Also, this at least means that we'll have a guest blogger to cover my participation, as my own opinion would contain an immeasurable conflict-of-interest. All in all, more exciting things to come!

See you on Sunday, when we get back to usual business...

New York Times Modern Love: r u kidding me? :(

2005-07-25T04:49:00.000-07:00

Today we strike new ground in the pursuit of romantic harmony in the New York publishing world. To complement the thoroughly sophmoric fun-poking going on with the Meet Market column, we'll now be taking a thoughtful look at a column in serious trouble - the New York Times Modern Love column in the Sunday Styles section. I'll go into further detail as to why this column is seriously flawed, but for now let's tackle the issue of Sandra Barron and her text-obsessed playboy friend.

Ms. Barron's biggest initial concern - or, more appropriately, collection of warning signs that she completely ignores - is her pursuer's disregard for some commonly accepted rules of dating and romantic pursuit. To clarify: this guy contacts early, often, and lamely. His worst error is a reliance on a method of communication that's simply childish, and with his grammar he takes immaturity to the extreme. Taking it one step further, he seems to be very aggressive, and does not care for things like the "2 day rule" and the concept of giving someone new a fair amount of space. At the beginning of the article, I felt that he was encroaching upon her. This makes it very clear who we are to see as the protagonist (the author) and the antagonist (the moblie-equipped pursuer).

Immediately I'm having problems with this situation. I don't like that the Modern Love columns are starting to take on a "survivor-tale" mentality, almost as the Lives column in the Sunday magazine had been doing consecutively for many weeks to the point where it was publicly noticed (specifically, by a column by James Rarus on mediabistro.com). I withhold full trust in Ms. Barron's account because it's clearly just a "she-said" story, and event descriptions are clearly being shaped to draw maximum empathy for the protagonist - herself.

Most important, though, throughout the first half of the article, is this observation: she feels that her pursuer's encroachment is not threatening. In fact, she encourages it. Look here:

I could already hear my friends citing his enthusiasm as evidence he was coming on too strong, but I'd had enough of aloof. I found his boldness refreshing.

So, at first, she likes the attention and the direct attitude.

This all changes down the line, all because he happened to get a little tipsy at the usual Wednesday night watering hole. What was accepted in the past is now spurned, mostly because Ms. Barron does a 180 degree turn and decides that her pursuer is an embarrassment and a potential threat. Her repulsion is almost spontaneously generated, and it's the result of a few key misunderstandings.

Let's break this down:

... [I, Sandra Barron, decided] it would be awkward trying to get to know him better while hanging out with people he had never met.

This is a decision that she made while she was heading to a common meeting place where both had been patrons previously. Which is to say that he has just as much of a right to be there as she does, and there's no indication that his only context at this bar is her presence. I think this is an incredibly selfish and anxiety-ridden decision on the author's part - in essence, "don't come to my neighborhood bar."

His reply was impossibly swift for its length: I live 45 seconds from there and I would be doing my own thing. I am not leachy. Very independent boy I am. I may or may not, depends where the wind takes me. Was it just me, or had things just taken a hairpin turn for the hostile?

One, anyone typing on one of today's souped-up mobile devices can spit this out rather quickly, so the author assigns anxiety here pointlessly. Two, this claim is fair enough, assuming that he isn't lying and that his place of residence really is within several blocks. Three, I read this message as witty and non-hostile; obviously Ms. Barron had a different opinion. If she hadn't fully decided that it was a hostile message, she had certainly let her concerns overwhelm the situation. It's all downhill from here:

Minutes later: Would u like me 2 stay away? Oh, dear. At this point, yes. Wires were crossing that would probably be best untangled in person, the next day. Entering the bar, I... whipped off a quick response, attempting to be polite and clear: Yeah, I guess that'd be better; you'd distract me if you were here.
A minute later, after I'd settled in with my friends, the orange light looked like a warning: 2 late, im here.

So, now, what is he supposed to do, leave?

Of course, I'm not defending the antagonist one bit. I think he's a social klutz. He never does anything truly threatening, but he never quite shuts up, either. His responses could be easily misconstrued as creepy. That's entirely his fault.

Still, Ms. Barron's response was undeserved. She becomes offended, defensive, and evasive within... oh, say, an hour and a half on her timeline. Her approval and congeniality speed away like it's a crime scene. Wouldn't this screw with any guy's head? She provides no understanding for the fact that he's tipsy and that the liquor is making him even more clumsy. She completely shuts him out. Every message is a threat.

Typically for this column, she ends the essay by presenting this as a personal disaster and reflects mainly on her own feelings of dread and regret. It's almost of no consequence that she's now at odds with an acquaintance with whom she shared some bonding - it's as if he's not a human being, but a seemingly-friendly stray dog that bit her hand one day. There's no motivation whatsoever to try and reach a friendly, if non-romantic, resolution. The only goal of the author is to paint herself as a victim and to justify her own neurotic behavior and decision-making. It's always about me in this column, isn't it?

I think she missed out on a good dinner, if you ask me. (But that's all she missed out on.)

The Modern Love column is in serious trouble because it has been justifying this type of solipistic reflection in increasingly intense forms over the past couple of months. The crescendo has been peaking in the past few weeks, with the "froky" column and the "nanny" story - both of which were effectively rebuked on the web. I think that the editors of the Styles section are not really trying to be the fairest publishers in the world, but are rather trying to strike up a common conversation - and maybe a controversy - by presenting these stories as such. I wonder why they're doing this. Certainly the reader gets a little more of their money's worth in the article - you have to now constantly wonder if the protagonist is more flawed than the antagonist, which makes it more interesting - but is this approach moral? Is it right to let the authors bury their former girlfriends/acquantainces/nannies, and bury themselves deeper in the process? Isn't this just a bit gimmicky? (not to mention the narrative use of technology - blogs and mobile phones - as a hackneyed gimmick to instill wonder first, dread later)

Or am I giving them too much credit for trying to be clever? Maybe they really do truly expect us to trust these authors, foolishly?

I hope to figure this all out as time goes on.

New York Post Meet Market: That &#$@ Stole My Umbrella!

2005-07-24T20:53:00.000-07:00

On this week's Tom & Mac show:

Virnalisa did indeed choose Todd the (evil?) H.R. manager. How'd it go?

Todd is a great talker and a real gentleman, but I don't think there's any chemistry there.

Awww, rats! The streak's broken! So what went wrong?

Well, nothing, it seems! Sounds like Virnalisa had a good time:

While we were eating dinner, the conversation flowed really well.

We talked about what food we liked... it was a surprise to learn that Todd dislikes the same things as me.

Meli Melo is a really nice restaurant... definitely a great blind date spot.

Perhaps her writeup makes things seem rosy at first glance, but this is all she really has to say about Todd that's nice:

I thought that he looked way better in the flesh than he did in his picture, so that was a nice surprise!

He's a really cool guy: If I had a girlfriend and thought that they'd get on, I'd definitely recommend Todd.

Yikes! That's no good! I mean, these statements sound vaguely flattering if you're not talking about a dating companion, but do they give an impression that any guy really wants to leave on a girl he's trying to romance? That you're not as ugly as she thought? That you would hook him up with an available girlfriend, but not date him yourself? These are all backhanded compliments! Why not add in that he reminds you of your brother, V? (Or worse, ex-boyfriend. That is a comparison that often indicates zero romance.)

Sadly, Todd was hopeful for more until he cracked open the Sunday paper:

We didn't kiss, but I did get her phone number, and I would like to meet her again to see if we are compatible past a first impression.

That's gotta be a rough way to find out. That said, his writeup was rather brief and made the date look even less exciting than what Virnalisa described. So, while each dater enjoyed the evening overall (it was probably the escargot appetizer, the coq au vin main course, and the 1999 Cabernet Franc), Cupid's arrow sails wide right. Darn.

We'll just have to try again, won't we?

Another repeat dater: Leslie! I'm happy to see her again. I approved of Liberal Leslie the last time - well, except for the liberal part. Remember, as a political moderate and profile evaluator, I tell people to leave political alliances out of the profile unless it's absolutely 100% a part of your core identity - otherwise, that just serves to alienate a large portion of the dating pool, including people who could have been your true love. Enough about that; Leslie is as cute and nice as ever, and I have strong hopes for our matchup this week as long as we have at least one good Democratic hopeful to choose from. You know, unlike the mayoral race in NYC this year...

Quick aside - Tom & Mac reassure Leslie about her fears for another worst date:

Let it be noted that Meet Market does not send its daters to Taco Bell or other assorted fast food restaurants

Oh please. I could easily spend $200 at Taco Bell.
(Just kidding. And I promise never to do that... again! heh heh)

Who's bringing the romance for next week? Let's see:

Boris loves his job, plays chess, enjoys a good vodka, kids and pets love him! Yeah, and, what else?

I can be a bit cool with strangers.

I'm really bad at small talk; When the discussion has no flavor, I feel sad.

Oi. This wasn't even an answer to one of the trick questions; this is the answer you've gotta nail down, dude. When they ask, "How would you describe yourself", you need to be closing! Ahhh, poor Boris. Fix up the profile and you'll be a winner, trust me.

Next, Matt, who is a corporate research specialist. Here's another example of unnecessary negativity in a dating profile, although Matt's overall profile keeps him in the running:

What do you think of the New York dating scene? It's extremely easy to meet people, but a real challenge to find someone you get along with and want to see romantically. It's also difficult at times to determine the other person's objectives, and that's probably the thing that annoys me the most. A lot of people act shady and keep you in the dark about what they really want or expect.

Or, you could have just stopped after the first sentence and everything would have been fine. The last thing you want to admit is that you're running into severe problems or annoyance in your dating experiences. It doesn't gather a lick of sympathy, but it does generate a lot of doubt for the discerning reader. Plus, as I've mentioned before, it never looks good when you're pointing the finger at others. All other things considered, though, Matt's profile paints a picture of a fairly adventurous person who might be attractive to Leslie.

Finally, we have Steve the web designer. Aside from being handsome, this guy has the mental goods to succeed. He sounds rather busy, but he looks like a great match for Leslie. And he gives us our story of the week, which ends with, and is best summarized by, this:

But then, when I go to leave, I find out she's taken my umbrella!

Horrible! You gotta be a nasty kind of b-word to do that to someone on a date! (Well, a replacement is only 5 bucks, but still.)

I'm going solidly with Steve. The other two guys look like nice men, but Steve's profile is strong all the way. It's a tight initial contest, as Steve is leading Boris by 2 points and Matt by 4 on the first day of voting.

Meet a Meet Market Survivor: A Queen Worst Comes Clean

2005-07-19T11:23:00.000-07:00

I re-introduce you to Jenny, who is about to be vindicated in a big way.

Jenny, as it stands, is our "Queen Worst the II", a label given because Jenny seemed to have conducted herself very rudely on a date with a nice man, therefore ruining the date and making the man question his noble purpose in pursuing romance. This type of bad behavior does not go unpunished 'round these parts: I gave her that awful nickname, printed the words "Jenny sucks," and openly pronounced that she deserved a case of genital crabs.

Thanks to Gawker (note: contradicting anyone's misperception of my sarcasm, I know exactly what it is; I'm as obsessed with it as much as I am with the Meet Market), my harsh criticism of Queen Worst the II was pushed directly into the heart of the Internet media complex, along with every other criticizing word in this blog since last September. So, it was only fair that I respond to Jenny when she left a note on the original entry that criticized her, herself describing a date experience that mostly contradicts the official report in the Post.

It's easy to disbelieve anything printed in the Post: just ask Dick Gephardt. Still, this was rather incredulous. Did Red Ryan, our reluctant hero (well, he wasn't the reluctant one; I was reluctant to make him the hero after reading his sad-sack story), indeed fabricate many of the key details that night to discredit Jenny after a date that did not go entirely as he expected?

Well, somewhat, but not entirely, as I would find out.

I had my initial doubts. For one, someone supposedly named "Jenny" responded to one of my blog entries, and did so in a rather anonymous way. For all I know, I could have been pranked. Second, we were proceeding into he-said-she-said territory, and who am I to declare the truth when I wasn't present for the date? Third, I truly hate backpedaling. I wished she simply had left a "Fuck you" message so that I could return the favor and get back to eating Corn Pops straight out of the box.

Still, I had to assume this was the real deal, and that I was being served notice of yet another interesting twist in the Meet Market column on a silver platter. How could I not sink my teeth into this? And, unlike Emily, my last interviewee, Jenny had actually gone out on a date sponsored by the Post and experienced the entire selection and rating process. I needed to know about all of this! My curiosity exploded like a gasoline truck dropped onto a dynamite factory. I just had to hear everything. This would be better than sex. (sort of an unexpected result when you're obsessed with a dating column. Or, as Foxy Jess called it, a "fucking column". Anyway...)

I led off with a sincere clarification - that is, I admitted that this blog was completely non-factual in relating the real-life stories behind every Meet Market column participant and blind date situation (and that’s the honest truth). I only believed Jenny did wrong to Ryan because it had been published in the Post, and the basis of my writing were facts that were only as good as the Post’s reputation for complete and unbiased information. (I’m cackling as I type this. Is this a cheap stab at the Post again? Let’s use a shotgun this time; all the New York papers have had recent credibility disasters. I could have written that Jenny also won Scratch n’ Match.)

Also, I said I’d retract the Queen Worst title; starting now, each of you reading this blog should now consider that designation completely nullified. I added that I never seriously hoped that anyone would catch a case of crabs for any reason. I then moved the conversation into email, where I groveled some more and invited her for an interview over a free cup of coffee to "set the record straight". She agreed, and we were in a Starbucks on the Upper East Side the very next morning to discuss exactly what went wrong and why she did not deserve all this negative attention.

(above: Jenny and I meet together)

Let me tell you about Jenny: she is a nice, polite young woman, originally from Dix Hills, NY, who currently lives in Manhattan and works as an assistant in the television industry. She spends a good deal of time with friends, often in bars, much like any other woman her age in Manhattan. She dates actively, participates in social events geared toward matching singles, and is looking to find a great man - and maybe a part of herself along the way. She is a friendly person who has a down-to-earth outlook on life; she does not carry herself with pretension or willful ignorance. She is intelligent, thoughtful, and daring. She is generally a happy person, easy to like and easy to please.

She is human, though, and makes mistakes. She is sometimes afraid of hurting other people's feelings, but can also be afraid of messing up her own life in revealing the truth when needed. She's afraid of being "too nice" and not direct enough with hopeful (or disappointing) romantic partners. She's young and vulnerable. At times, when we discussed something she did that could have been done better, she hid her face in her hands and made a regretful sound as if everything wrong in the world was coming down on top of her. Like many young people in New York, she is progressing, but not quite finished maturing.

Presented with the real life Jenny, it was apparent to me that she is not the monster that I made her out to be. That was a relief, not only because I wish not to find women like that in New York, but also because I wasn't tricked into this meeting just to pay for a Green Tea Frappuccino that would be dumped on my head in return for the insults. She really did wish to set the record straight.

Which brings us to that fateful night.

The restaurant portion of the date was fairly harmless, although certainly not ideal. Jenny's worst accusation is that Ryan tried some funny leg-touching business with his hands while the Post's freelance photographer was trying to get a shot to use in the resulting article. Given that things didn't really get worse than that overall, I'd have to say that the meal wasn't an overall disaster, but it wasn't exactly comfortable either. Jenny admits that, from the beginning, she did not really find sparks between herself and Ryan, which was due to (a lack of) physical attraction and mental connection. Apparently, Ryan's not as interesting and sharp-witted as Jenny would like, and she attributes this to the difference between being raised on Long Island and being raised in the Midwest. (sure, that's an unfair shot on Ryan's Midwest origins, but it's true that those are starkly different backgrounds). Jenny fully confesses that, as mentioned in the original article, she ran a half-hour late to the date and needed to call in ahead of time to let Ryan know. There was some pleasant smalltalk throughout the date, except at the point when Ryan mentioned a friend's observation that Jenny looked crazy in the pictures provided by the Post for review. That was indeed unflattering for Jenny, and quite stupid of Ryan to mention.

Jenny also admits that details after this are a little hazy, which might be due to servings of a strong liqueur that followed the main courses – and that she consumed a fairly large meal that made her tired in the first place. Still, all parties seem to have been lucid following the restaurant portion of the date. What followed, in a nutshell, was this: Ryan continued to accompany Jenny further into the night even as Jenny was rather weary of continuing the date, and Jenny protested only in subtle ways. She was not direct with him, but she did try to weasel out of the date by pretending that she had met a usual friend at the bar (when, in fact, this "friend" was someone who was a just familiar bar patron who she cajoled into posing as a friend). It seems that Ryan, however, took a very long time to "get the hint."

He did buy her a rose out on the street along the way, but failed to mention the fact that he asked her for the money to buy it first without telling her what it was for. This situation sounds very, very lame.

What followed that night is the part that is of most importance to Jenny's overall forgiveness. Ryan apparently called her a bunch of times after the date to ask her out again, and she did not return his calls. That was boorish behavior on her behalf, which she admits, and it would have been best to let Ryan know directly that she did not wish to continue seeing him romantically. But Ryan then committed a heinous foul: he changed his opinion of Jenny as a reflection of his disappointment in not being received well by her, and then delivered a scathing (and somewhat pathetic) assessment of his blind date to Tom, Mackenzie, and the Post's entire Sunday circulation. Dirty pool, my fellow man. Jenny, in the meantime, tried to take the high road with her own assessment and left out the scathing criticisms in favor of a rather bland recollection of the experience. That was her final mistake; the Post ran what they had, and it didn't make Jenny look good at all.

Ryan somehow continued this show of lameness in a subsequent encounter, but the details of that incident are hardly relevant. You just need to know that Ryan is clueless, cloying, and clumsy if you are to at all believe Jenny's account of the evening. As for Jenny, she knows in her heart and mind that she was clumsy herself, if only to try to avoid an unpleasant ending to an already disappointing evening. She had tried to justify it to herself, but she did the face-in-hands thing when I confronted her with it.

As I said earlier, Jenny makes mistakes. Each of us would hope not to be publicly crucified for our own mistakes the way Jenny was for her own. I found enough contrition in her recounting of the event to accept her sympathetically. I also engaged her with a lot of amusing and interesting conversation, and she seemed like a very nice and polite person; this leads me to believe that she would not have done these things in better conditions.

Now, the Meet Market dirt:

* She applied through the contest form on the website; no Friendster necessary.

* She at first got along really well with Mackenzie over the phone; they even discussed hair salons. You know, girl talk stuff. Apparently, this didn't continue after the date.

* A check mistakenly arrived at the end of the meal, and was soon afterward retracted by the management with sincere apologies. This was not before they had a look at the bill, which was around $200 before tip (a price Jenny balked at). This is what two young twentysomethings get when they win a contest from the Post! That’s excessive, don’t you think? Meanwhile, Ryan was so pleased with his free meal that he childishly bragged about it to everyone, during and afterward.

* "Imaging specialist" roughly means photocopier salesman in Ryan-speak.

* The questionnaire after the date includes questions about the meal and atmosphere at the restaurant. As with the profiles, responses are printed almost verbatim without the questions, just as I suspected. And Tom, who called almost two weeks after the date to provide the questionnaire, wanted the answers emailed rather than spoken.

* The Post is apparently desperate for worthy participants. (oooh oooh oooh!)

* And Ryan, it is rumored, might get a second chance at picking a date! (ick!)

Obviously, I got my coffee's worth out of this meeting.

We parted, and it left me pondering what this means for all of us. I've now seen up close that we truly have no idea what's going on behind the scenes at these dates. As I said in my original "clarification," this is a he-said-she-said story and I'd like to believe both of them, yet would be naive to fully accept either story. True, Jenny's story sounds more plausible because she doesn't contradict Ryan's unflattering facts about her behavior – yet did Jenny make any other mistakes that weren’t mentioned? Naturally, this applies to every other story we've heard about every date (except for Pamela and Ian, who, according to the freelance photographer by way of Jenny, really do love each other to pieces and spend lots of time together). I now need to consider a whole world of deeper possible motivations when reviewing a date gone wrong - unless I choose instead to continue being a callous bastard. (Yeah, probably.) And, from a wider point of view, we can see more ways in which love's fragile house of cards can fall apart. This both saddens and fascinates me.

Love is not nearly as fascinating as all this dirt on the Meet Market column, though! How crazy is all of this? I've met with TWO participants in the contest now, and I have all the inside info I could ever want, and then some. We have a Queen Worst dethroned, plus a BRAND NEW KING WORST in Ryan! Yes, it's Vikas no more! And we might have a sitting king reappear in the column, which should be LOADS of fun!

Soon, we’ll hear from two more Meet Market participants. One is Dena. The other: myself.

New York Post Dating: Dancing With The Stars

2005-07-18T09:55:00.000-07:00

Let's cut the silliness for a second; everyone's reading this blog now. Tom & Mackenzie, many of the former daters, half of Gawker's readership, and probably all the girls I've dated in New York who dumped me for real estate brokers. Plus, my face is now on this blog. The stakes are indeed raised. I actually have to spellcheck my entries now. I'll meet the pressure with unbridled enthusiasm, of course; our vast team of creative professionals (all the voices in my head, that is) will be working around the clock to deliver more content than ever before. So keep reading!

Back to the silliness, because the Meet Market is what counts the most.

Kelli, our heroine, chose Mark the actor for her date. I initially warned against this because Mark, while looking good, seemed to be a bit average. I never found anything particularly wrong with being "average", but somehow I thought David was a better pick. No matter, though - Kelli and Mark had a wonderful time together, and hit it off fabulously.

In the column, you'll see a picture of them that's very appealing and looks as if it were captured mid-tango. Although dancing wasn't a part of the date, they seem to have both truly enjoyed themselves. Kelli spills that a future date is planned, so maybe there will be a tango in the future! Three cheers for these two happy winners!

I observed that Kelli's writeup, by the way, was far more interesting than Mark's. I guess Mark just isn't the writer type, and perhaps that threw me off last week. I thought he was phenomenally more charming on the date than he was in either his profile or post-date writeup. (Is that a pun? Post-date? Ugh.) Ah, such is the difficulty of trying to divine success from hasty answers to dating profile questions.

I also have to be thankful for this: I gave Kelli the benefit of the doubt when she said she wanted someone who wasn't "boring." That could mean a lot of things, on one extreme end meaning that Kelli is hard to entertain and has no patience for those who don't fit the Tom Wolfe-like definition of "master of the universe." Many girls in New York are like that, but that wasn't the case with Kelli, and I shied away from that assumption on a gut feeling. Not all of my gut feelings are correct, but sometimes they help a lot.

Speaking of instincts, next week's chooser is someone who in the past definitely seemed to be greater than the sum of her profile: Virnalisa! I said several weeks ago:

Virnalisa might be the type of girl that you'd want to marry.

The rest of her profile wasn't as strong, but I had a hunch that she was alright. I'm not sure if this was in her profile the last time, but this line shows that she's a nice girl with a healthy dose of date savvy:

Virnalisa's ideal date would involve a restaurant with great ambience and eclectic food - "And an impressive wine list, or at least good sangria! Afterwards, we'd go out dancing."

I like that. Especially the sangria part. *hiccup!*

Our suitors:

Phillip, a 27-year-old partner in a trading firm. He's got money, ladies! Otherwise, he seems like a man's man - plays poker, likes sports, and doesn't mind heavy drinking on a date. I think he's an interesting and cool guy, certainly, but is he a little too rough and tumble for Virnalisa? I don't know. We'll keep him in mind.

Oh, and guys, never admit drinking anything pink. Unless it's Pepto Bismol.

Next, we have Todd, who I'll nickname Catbert for fun. Yes, he works in Human Resources - which means he knows your medical records and he's been filing your expense forms for all those stops at the clinic recently. (It's all come up negative, I swear!)

How would you describe yourself? I'm the most well-rounded person that I know - and I'm not bragging!

Understood, Todd, but I'd have clipped that line anyway. Your interests are strong enough to give that impression on their own.

My life has never been about amassing wealth.

I don't think Phillip and Todd would have much to talk about together.

I'm a hopeless romantic who realizes that people who date in the 21st century are often anything but romantic.

Good guy, great beginning, bad ending. Don't blame others for your frustration. Just stand tall and let your heart do the talking. The only other noteworthy thing is that Todd ended up on a date with a Long Island girl who was sexually aggressive and kind of cheesy. Since he was freaked out, he might find Virnalisa (the polar opposite) to be quite the catch. Meanwhile, if you're the type of girl who wears a fake tan and boob glitter, give me a call, pookie-wookie.

Last, we have Luke. Does he have the Force with him? (Do I have anything better than jokes from a quarter of a century ago?) He looks exactly like Curt Schilling, which we won't hold against him. (those awful Sox. gag.) He enjoys Sunday brunch, inappropriate conversations, good movies, good cheese, and Stella Artois. I couldn't have come up with better myself. Maybe Virnalisa will dig that? I noted that he abstained from the worst date question. Awesome! I hate that question, dude.

It’s a tough field this week. Virnalisa's got three pretty reasonable guys to choose from. I think Catbert is the softest and cuddliest, so I'll pick him. Virnalisa can't go wrong either way. (Phillip’s winning the voting, if you’re curious) Cheers to Tom and Mackenzie for setting up Virnalisa once again, and for giving her some excellent choices.

(Do something wrong again. Please. It's hard to write this when you're on a winning streak!)

Meet a Meet Market Survivor! Our Night With Emily

2005-07-14T00:44:00.000-07:00

Some website named Gawker linked me earlier this week. Who the hell are they? Never heard of them. I guess I'll add them to my blogroll or something, if I ever get one. Anyway, they sent a hell of a lot of traffic my way, and people started buzzing.

Naturally, this meant people who were written about here in the column would find me and start writing back. Most responses, I assume, would be in defense of a dater - because I'm an asshole often when referring to the daters as I write my reviews. Luckily, my first experience in hearing directly from a dater was from Emily, who was part of a 3-girl selection from a few weeks back. At the time of the review, I was wary about her based on her pickiness from her profile.

Well, after meeting her, I can assure you that nothing changed. She's definitely picky. And I love her to death for it.

A little background:

I originally heard from Emily through a comment on the post where I wrote about her. She left me a link to her blog, where she had drafted a response that was hardly critical of my writeup but still defended her profile. It seems her hurriedly-completed questionnaire was copied verbatim for the column even though she thought it would be used not as copy, but as a guide for the authors to try to set her up with the right person. (She had never seen the column previously, so she didn't know how it worked.) Easy mistake, bad result. She would have spent more time crafting her answers had she known they would appear as-is in the paper. Plus, they skipped over all the good answers, naturally.

We exchanged polite e-mails after this, and I found that she'd be hosting a happy hour for Drinking Liberally in Park Slope; I offered to come along for the ride, as I've never been to a liberal-themed happy hour before (or Park Slope, for that matter) and I figured it would be something fun to try.

Or, I just initially figured the event wouldn't get too much in the way of me asking her about her experience in the column. After all, this was a chance to meet a real-life Meet Market participant! Wow! This would certainly blur the line between hack writing and reality! I was obsessively curious. I overflowed with potential questions. I wanted to know EVERYTHING.

Before we get to that part, I should add that I enjoyed the event very much, and I recommend it to others. I'm a moderate and not strictly a liberal, but I fit in quite well; no one acted like a partisan raving lunatic, which is something I feared I might possibly run into. Everyone was sensible and passionate about politics. I appreciated their perspective. There were some good conversations. Also, Yuengling pints were $3.

Back to the questions:
(Emily and I having a chat)
I didn't shy from getting to know her and asking the questions about the experience. She's a very cool person and answered all questions happily. We posed for pictures, acted goofy with other blog friends, and made fun of the Post.

I got to know that, yes, indeed, she is a dedicated liberal and would not want to be in a situation where a conservative male would butt heads with her. She is also insistent on avoiding dates with certain types of men, which is where the "What's Not Sexy?" list came from. My take: for a general dating profile, this is fair enough. Her list of criteria will surely exclude certain people from her potential dating pool, but that's sort of the point. She knows what she likes and what she stands for - and she isn't afraid to be clear and open about it from the beginning. She's not pompous or dismissive, either - she is friendly and cordial with everyone regardless of whether they're "sexy" or not. I find all of that admirable.

She knows that her criteria might have reduced her chances of winning the dating contest - and I agree with that - but to her, that's hardly a concern. She doesn't think she lost out on anything. As a matter of fact, she is now seeing a guy that she met soon after the column ran, and she's currently very happy with him. That's so nice, isn't it? (Especially considering that sparks didn't fly between Amber and Dave... Real Life - 1, Tom & Mackenzie - 0)

So, she's an alright person and didn't deserve to be summarily dismissed. Not that she cares, because she's a writer too and knows that this is all a harmless goof.

Now, the dirt:

* Mackenzie found her on... wait for it... wait for it... Friendster. Yes, folks, keep those Friendster profiles in tip-top shape so that you can land a date with the Post!

* Why is Mackenzie trolling Friendster for participants? Apparently, the people who write in with contest entries are often "creepy". Yeah, I could see that happening. I mean, these are Post readers...

* Mackenzie forwarded to Emily a questionnaire labeled "Dating_Questionnaire-Women". It contained many of the same questions as the online entry form, if not the exact same ones.

* Emily filled it out quickly (without thinking it would be used for copy) and returned it within 5 minutes. The result: hasty answers ended up unedited in the Sunday paper. She was somewhat horrified by this, so she clarified it in her blog.

* As we all know, Dave chose Amber instead and it's all over and done.

So, that's how the process worked for Emily. My curiosity sated, we went back to beer and burritos.

In the end, we now have a very clear insight as to how this whole process goes, and we know what to tell others to watch out for. I have also learned to treat the daters... ehhh, not any differently! If it's all a big joke, I can summarily dismiss whoever I want! Remember, Tom & Mackenzie aren't even getting the names right sometimes!

Coming soon: "Queen Worst the II" writes in! And, it turns out, she's not "Worst" at all! And I have to retract a comment about her catching crabs! Stay tuned!

New York Post Dating: Better Than Average

2005-07-11T10:20:00.000-07:00

Winning streaks don't last forever, sadly. This week, we see our Meet Market matchup stumble out of the gate and never pick up steam. Tom and Mackenzie are no longer hot, but we might pick things back up again next week. So, let's begin with our recap...

David chose Amber for the date. My warning last week was that Amber needed someone quite interesting to be a romantic partner, because otherwise things wouldn't work out. I approved of David, but I didn't think he'd meet Amber's expectations.

And was I right?

I was right.

Amber was immediately dismissive of David due to a time mixup. He never quite recovered from his late arrival to El Faro ("which made for a great blind date spot!"), although the date was quite eventful overall. (After dinner, he took her out for dancing and "overpriced" drinks. Aww, how sweet. Now stop complaining about the prices.) I think she knew immediately that there wasn't the flame of romance burning between them. That's a shame, because David's a little more hopeful than she is for future romance. Love sucks.

So, in the end, Amber's rather picky and David's a little cheap. Crash, fire, burn. Sorry, try again.

There's better news for next week, though. Kelli is our female dater, and there's three critically important things you need to know about her:

She's unbelievably hot. Like a porn star.
She just moved to New York a month ago. This is on top of being rather young and perky.
She's Jason's roommate. Jason? That's right, The Closer.

Needless to say, I'm overflowing with excitement for Kelli. I think her Closer connection is going to bring her good luck on the date. Still, though, as she admits herself, average isn't good enough. She's got three guys to pick from, so let's see if we can shoot for the moon here.

David is a 26-year-old "real estate finance executive." If God had a job title, that would be it. Quotables:

What do you think of the New York dating scene? Just because you pour syrup on it, doesn't make it pancakes.

What three things can you not live without? Ranch dressing, electricity and vacation days.

Gems! What the hell does any of that mean? Bizarre! And with all the food mentions, it's a good thing the date will probably be at a self-promoting restaurant! Otherwise, the most important nugget is, "I'm a genuine person, just trying to find my way like everyone else." Just like Kelli. I think he's got potential with her.

Next, we have Mark, a young actor.

I work out daily

Meh. I walk to the subway daily, too. After reading the rest of his profile, he seems alright - but rather average in every department, if you know what I mean. David's got it all over him.

Finally, we have Neil. He spooks me out a little bit, as some of these daters do when the photograph is really bad (or worse, when they're just not photogenic). Let's see if personality can make up for it:

We're buying. What are you drinking? Pabst Blue Ribbon in a can.

Classy! My kind of guy! But not Kelli's type of guy. Out.

So, in the end, it's David all the way. David's got 60% of the vote already on Monday. No brainer. Just cross your fingers and hope for the best for these two young love-seekers. (And we'll hope the restaurant has a "great atmosphere", as always.) Bounce.

New York Post Dating: If You Have Nothing Good To Say About A Free Meal, That's A Bad Sign

2005-07-04T20:09:00.000-07:00

The title refers to this week's dater descriptions, clickable from the Post's Dating homepage. Elyse chose Evan (my first pick), and although Zanzibar comped them the cuisine, this is all either of them had to say about the place:

...the dinner had definite adventure potential.

The vibe at the restaurant really helped to ease the date. There were no candles or anything like that...

Okay, well, what about the food? Did these two even eat real food? It seems like all they had were cocktails. Either that, or they had little positive to say about the place when it came to the main courses. Again, it says nothing good about Zanzibar if they couldn't remember anything complimentary about the main course. Usually any meal is a great meal if it's seasoned with "free".
(As if I really cared about the restaurant...)

Onto the date review! And, it was fantastic! Although both daters come up short on details, there was definitely chemistry there (beyond mixology, anyway). Elyse likes Evan, Evan likes Elyse, and they should both see each other again. One goofy quote from Elyse warrants mention, though:

The dating scene in the city is challenging. There are so many good-looking people!

Attack of the Bigger Better Deal, eh? Or did she forget the follwing suffix: "good-looking people who are completely demented and borderline psychotic?" I mean, that makes more sense!

With another success, we're on a 4-week winning streak. Can Tom and Mackenzie keep it going? Hey, we always love a good winning streak in the summer! (something which the Yankees and Mets should take a hint from!)

Onto this week's choice. The man of the week is David, who seems to have a rather bland but hardly indicting profile. There's just not enough here to learn about him so that we have a good shot at finding the right kind of girl for a date. All we know for sure is that he's ambitious and motivated, and that nothing seems awful about him. For romance, he says he wants a dinner and a great kiss - that's not saying much. I'd hope that's what everyone would be looking for here.

Well, what can we do? Just pick the nicest girl of these three and hope for the best:

Amber's an administrative assistant in a glamour stance. Strike a pose! She looks rather tall, although that should have no meaning at all here. She loves her camera, she enjoys eating, and her family is important to her - all good signs. She likes ambitious men - score one for David! The only warning sign is Amber's worst-date-ever answer, which reveals that Amber needs her dates to be interesting. I don't consider this such a bad thing overall, but let's keep that one in the back of our heads for now... David hasn't revealed anything particularly interesting about himself in his profile, so we may have an issue here if he's not as colorful as Amber would prefer him to be.

Emily's profile is a little more troubling. The good parts: she's cute, likes ambitious guys, and is outgoing. The bad news: she's likely staunchly liberal and seems to be well-immersed in that scene. It comes up in three answers to various questions. So, she's poltically obsessed, and that could be divisive. A more pertinent concern: she seems to rule out guys who are super trendy, muscular, gadget-obsessed (or hyper-communicative), skinny, Republican, or slick-haired. Not that I defend any of those attributes, but she takes more time excluding people than describing what she really wants. I'm wary about her. Except for the knitting part.

Speaking of which, Annie likes knitting too! And photography! (Both are seemingly popular interests for women here in the Meet Market; just as common as guys enjoy "working out" and "dancing". Heh.) She looks a little soft on the edges, but she's still a very cute girl whom I wouldn't mind taking out on a date for looks alone. Her personality shines through nicely here; unlike Amber, Annie doesn't speak as if she's easily bored with someone quickly. That's a great sign for both Annie and David, especially since David likely qualifies as non-exciting if his profile above is any real indication.

I'm sold on Annie. She seems like the nicest girl who will probably have a great time on the date no matter what. Sounds like a great match for David; low-risk and excellent compatiblity make for a winning combination. The readers think so, too - she's winning the poll with over 70% of the vote! Wow, what a good showing!

And a happy air-conditioned week to you all! See you early next week...

New York Post Dating: Meet A Man Who Could Sell Ice To Eskimos

2005-06-27T10:51:00.000-07:00

Linky linky.
Wow, Jason is that good. I've marveled for the past two weeks at Jason's strong dating profile, and The Closer made his potential a reality when he took Elizabeth-who-looks-like-Bree out on a date that went fabulously.

Details? Bree is just a sweet girl from Virginia who likes her men polite, charming, and handsome. Her type of man is listed in the dictionary under the word "suitor." Jason, who never met a customer he couldn't sell to, took on the role of suitor and acted as the perfect gentleman. He even brought her flowers to the date! What a guy!

The best quote, if I could pick just one:

"She mentioned that she was happy "not to get someone sarcastic" so I was like, that was lucky! Usually I am more like that. But Elizabeth was so nice that I didn't want to joke around with her in that way, or make her uncomfortable.... But also, it's part of the strange thing about dating, right? Her personality - which is very polite and charming - made me want to be polite and charming as well."

I told you, this guy is good. That's why he's The Closer. If there were a Meet Market Hall of Fame, this guy would be one of the charter inductees.

Anyway, Bree wants to keep seeing him, and they're going to the movies this week, so score a win for Tom and Mackenzie. We've got a three-week winning streak going here, going back to Dena's back-on-the-scene date. (Not to rain on the parade, but we needed a winning streak after this disaster).

Who's up next? Another recycled Meet Market candidate! It's Elyse, the girl who blew away the polls three weeks ago. No new information here - she's cute, but she's got a weird, sometimes contradictory profile - so I'll just include this picture caption copied exactly as-is from the Post's website:

She's not afraid to laza around!.

This dating ad has been brought to you by the Tom Sykes and Mackenzie Dawson Parks Graduate School of Language and Literature. Enrlol [sic] today!

Three fun guys to choose from this week:

John's a mid 20's actor, going for the bedheaded look. He looks like he bats for the other team, no? Well, according to the New York Times, you just can't tell anymore... vaguely gay is hot now. (Or was, before they mentioned it) Anyway, we'll assume that he's just an expensively dressed metrosexual hetero male. He likes to sleep in on the weekends, which somewhat fits Elyse's lifestyle as described in her profile. So he's definitely in the hunt. Now, time for a story break:

What was your worst date ever? It was my junior prom, and my date was in on a sick joke with my ex-girlfriend to make sure I didn't have a good time. When we got to the prom, my date informed me that she doesn't dance and was just going to sit down all evening. That might not seem so bad, except that I am a dancer and loved to dance the night away at school dances. Not that night. I just sat.

Ah, a male actor who dresses expensively and loves to dance? If anything, look for this guy in the Times' Sunday Styles section soon! He's practically made for them!

Next, Phillipe is a mid 20's law student. A quick aside: how do female daters really look upon law students? I can't tell. I mean, such men would be very intelligent and have excellent earnings potential, but they're still in school. Also, they're most likely broke. Do women embrace the brains, or do they lack the patience to hang out with a guy who has no money and little time to himself? Anyway, back on track - He's a little funny looking (handsome, yet his clothes fit oddly big, and he's got that head-tilt smile that should have qualified this photo to be shredded and burned). He likes farmers' markets, for undisclosed reasons (I don't think I'd want to know). And then there's this - he's got a bad case of BBD, revealed with the following quote about the NY dating scene:

...it's like an all-you-can-eat buffet, where you eat too much and feel sick.

Naturally, I have a billion wise-ass remarks right about now. To start, reading Phillipe's profile doesn't overfill me, but rather presents me with a straight case of food-poisoning. Or, indeed, NYC is like an all-you-can-eat buffet - a tits-and-ass smorgasboard, except all the food's been out a little too long. And, if you do indulge too much in the dating scene, you won't only be emotionally sick, but you'll also probably catch a few illnesses along the way. This quote is rich in metaphors. And Phillipe is rich in not-getting-picked-for-a-date.

Then, we have Evan, a mid-20's editorial assistant. Another quick observation, we have a pretty good representation of young-20's male professionals here. The artsy type, the high-flying-job type, and the media type. Continuing:

I also have a very serious side, and like having intellectual conversations.

I know some people don't think of themselves as idiots, but you simply must figure out a better way of expressing that sentiment than saying "I like having intellectual conversations." Especially for a guy who works in publishing! More about Evan: he likes tapas, loves his iPod, and hates smoking. He wants an intelligent girl with whom he can listen to his Postal Service CD (hipster band of the day). Fair enough, although I find all of this to be a bit too artificially highbrow - I mean, what does an EA make in NYC? Not more than $35,000 right? That's not paying for any kind of sushi that I'd willingly eat. (yet another stomach-illness reference)

Okay, so what's the verdict here? It's Evan on one condition - Elyse must not smoke. Considering all other things, their tastes are probably a close match and I think Elyse will be well-entertained enough to consider future dates. (Love? I don't think anyone here is ready. Let's just try for a match that won't bore Elyse to death) The voters agree with my assessment, giving Evan 75% of the vote. John wouldn't be a bad pick either, assuming that he dates females. (You'd think that would be a sure thing, right? We've seen worse fuckups in this dating column) Phillipe, meanwhile, gets his profile back dripping with red ink from revision marks - he looks like a nice and interesting guy, so I think he's got great potential if he can get the words right.

And with that, I bid you mehalo.

New York Post Dating: So Cute It Hurts

2005-06-21T11:27:00.000-07:00

Another fine week in dating land - and no, I'm not being sarcastic. For Megan chose underdog Matt, and Matt proved to be a fine choice. The picture of the daters together shows them drinking out of the same glass through two straws! How cute! It's won't be long before they're calling each other "honey" and rubbing noses together on a park bench. Lord help us.

Need proof? Says Megan:

The highlight of the date was when the photographer was taking pictures of us near a garden and my heel got caught in the dirt and I tripped and almost fell, but Matt caught me.

and:

Hopefully, on my next date I won't trip again. But if I do end up falling, having a guy like Matthew to catch me would be A-OK.

And if you're not nauseous enough already, our friend Tom signed a multi-million book deal to write a memoir recently. Not to piss in his cereal (seriously, congrats man), but where's this all this fucking money when I want to write something about my life? I don't get nearly that much to talk about myself; people usually give me a dollar just to go away.

Well, enough with the happy news. It's time to discuss next week's daters, and there's nothing happy about sending two girls home. Especially when the man of choice this week is Jason, the closer! Yes, they recycled him already in just one week's time - if you recall, he was the one I picked last week over Matt. Well, I guess he's just that good.

Our choice this week is easy. Three girls, Virnalisa, Elizabeth, and Chun. Let's see what Virnalisa says:

What three things can you not live without? Music, cell phone and travel.

Cell phone? Instant rejection.

We'll skip ahead to Chun:

What three things can you not live without? A cellphone, food and friends - if friends count as a "thing!"

I'm glad to see that friends are only two steps down the priority list from a cellphone. You know, some people put FreshDirect and Starbucks in-between those two on the list. Anyway, she's out.

Am I being dismissive too quickly? Yes. I'll tell the truth - I don't know if extra-pretty-boy Jason would be entirely compatible with Virnalisa and Chun. They're both cute girls, and they seem to have decent personalities, but I have a hunch that they're not enough like Jason to even be friends with him. Jason would likely think both are sweet girls, but it would be over after the free meal. I sense a cultural and physical attraction divide that is simply too wide to cross. And no, Jason is not too good for either of these two - as a matter of fact, Virnalisa might be the type of girl that you'd want to marry. I'm babbling now, so let's continue with the next profile...

... And we have Bree, newly widowed from her husband Rex's untimely death. No! Stop it! Her name is Elizabeth. She might look almost exactly like one of the Desperate Housewives (down to the slightly sharp-looking facial angles), but that's just a TV show! Liz is a real person. And we'll be calling her Bree from now on. Her profile suggests that she's neither a bore nor a heinous beast, so Jason should be happy. While we're here, let's take another story break:

What was your worst date ever? It's a tie - the guy with the extreme facial twitch, or the guy who took me to dinner on a "buy one meal, get one free" coupon, and then suggested we split the check.

Hey, I didn't mean to be so cheap on that date, Bree - it's just that my unemployment check got delayed in the mail that week! (Yuk yuk yuk...)

My vote's with Bree. A majority of the online voters agree. Of course, none of that matters, because The Closer makes the pick. (Desperate Housewives, The Closer - is this Dating or TV listings?)

See you next week...

New York Post Dating: Second Place is a Set Of Steak Knives (but unfortunately, no visits from the chef)

2005-06-12T21:02:00.000-07:00

Just in case you need a reminder, here's where to go to find the world's bestest ever dating column...

Dena could have picked Ari (I see that half of the online readers did), but instead went with Dan (who I surmised may have ego problems and lusty intentions; am I allowed to say that about other people if that's a perfect description of myself? Just asking). How did the date go? Let's find out:

First, I should mention that they went to "a brand-new hot spot, Ludo, in the East Village." Ludo's landlord just revised next year's lease and added a few zeroes at the end of the rent. Anyway,

He said: Dena looked great, and she has an easy conversational style, which made the date very easy.

Dan, I'd love to make fun of your vague and lazily-worded half-hearted compliments, but it's just too easy.

In order for a date to go well for me, it's important that a girl laughs at my jokes, and she did just that, all night long!

While we all marvel at Dan's complete failure of modesty, I should make an open announcement that if you're female and you laugh at this blog, I will submit myself to you. And make you breakfast in the morning, too.

Ludo was an excellent date spot

blah blah blah Ludo's great, the chef came out, gave us his home phone number, and told us to call him if we ever needed anything at any time. Okay, I just added that last part in. But you get the point.

As the date wound down we discussed grabbing some drinks elsewhere, but unfortunately I had to get up early, so we exchanged numbers and called it a night.

Meh. That sounds lame. So does this:

As for us seeing each other again, I'm not entirely sure because as much fun as the date was, I'm a fairly tall person and I generally prefer girls who are taller. Who knows, though? Crazier things have happened.

Well, Dena would indeed be crazy if she continued to pursue this dork. Don't get me wrong, Dena had a fun time and used this opportunity to experience a night out on a date after the end of a long-term relationship - those are good things. However, this guy is totally not a good fit for Dena, and it's all because of him. Even though she thought many positive things about him from their night together, she should squash any idea of pursuing him further. I'm hoping that I don't have to tell her that, and that his writeup speaks for itself.

After some thought and hesitation, I call this date a success. Although a long-term match won't likely (and absolutely SHOULD NOT) result from the experience, I see that two young not-evil people had a nice time. Tom and Mackenzie sort of did their job right on this one. The story is that a girl coming out of a long-term relationship had a good start getting back into the dating scene. That's a New York happy ending if I've ever seen one.

Now, will we be happy with next week's date? Let's see:

MEET Megan, a beautiful commercial advertising sales assistant...

I would like to recuse myself from writing further about Megan, but I cannot because I'm the only writer in the house tonight and this post would go unfinished. So, a bit of disclosure is necessary: I fit very well with Megan's desires. It's almost spooky when she starts mentioning the "BBD" stuff, because I've been very clear about avoiding that sort of problem in the past (as she also wishes to do). I think she's cute, sensible, and right up my alley. I've been doe-eyed over some prior contestants, but with Megan I simply think that we're a very logical fit. Expect me to be overly critical of her male choices in a few minutes.

Continuing:

who describes herself as outgoing, ambitious, thoughtful and adventurous.

Jeez, I wrote that about myself. I never realized it sounded so contrived and self-congratulatory. Then again, for Megan you can add "straightforward" and "concise" to the list, and maybe I can overlook the potential (not certainty) of Megan's ego being out-of-control. Maybe she's just self-assertive in a good way? It's my job to point out that either is possible, and both are equally likely without further conclusive evidence. Also, to repeat a sentiment from earlier, I'd be a perfect fit for her. In poker terms, I'll see her "self-congratulatory" and raise her a "megalomaniac".

I very strongly observed this: she expects to be impressed. She has high sights for an ideal date, so whoever gets picked will have to put in some effort to make this thing work out. Now, let's get to that part of things:

Jason's a 23-year-old sales executive. "Coffee's for closers", eh Jason? You'll need to be a closer to win Megan's heart. Let's see if he has what it takes:

I'd say I am very ambitious and confident. Despite the fact that I am only 23, I have laid out specific goals that I've set for myself in both my professional and personal life.

Okay, he's a good fit!

What do you like to do when you're not working? I'm usually in the gym, riding motorcycles, going to the movies, traveling, and going for walks around Manhattan.

"Uhhh, which way is the gym? I'll check it out..." Heh heh. Other than that part and the fact that he's 23 (quite young), I see nothing wrong with his potential to make this work. We'll keep him in mind as a solid pick.

Next, Chris the cop. Megan, do you like the Yankees?

I'd love someone that is also into sports and would want to watch them with me.

Pop fly, infield, caught by Jeter for the out.

Finally, we have Matt, who seemingly needs a posture lesson based on his picture. He's standing in some sort of a combination of a slouch and a fey hand gesture. Matt's a little older than Megan (it appears). That's not a bad thing. But this is:

My personality is the selling point, I think.

Matt's self description matches his posture. I think he's nice, and Megan might like him, but this would be strictly a "friends-only" type setup. While we're here, let's take a story break:

What was your worst date ever? I went out with a girl who picked the most expensive restaurant in my town, then proceeded to order expensive food - of which she ate about three bites. The bill came, and she made not even the slightest offer to pay. All she did the entire evening was complain about how past ex-boyfriends had treated her poorly. After dinner, she suggested a coffee shop that had ice cream and board games. I wasn't a fan of this girl, so I was not inclined to be gracious and let her win. I beat her in nine consecutive times, and in a fit of rage, she threw the game pieces at me.

Fun! Was her name Jenny by any chance?

Matt's unfortunate story makes him an appealing underdog. Plus, he's an investment banker, so he can afford the sort of dating lifestyle that Megan can guide him toward, if she's up to the task. However, in the end, Jason's the closer. As of Sunday night, a leading plurality of 45.9% from the online readers agree. Megan, we wish you well no matter who you choose, whether it's Jason, Chris, or Matt.

*cough cough* or me *cough*

New York Post Dating: How To Lose A Guy In 10 Minutes

2005-06-06T13:10:00.000-07:00

Fun, fun, fun!!! People, we have an exciting edition for you this week! Get ready by curling up into a fetal position and chewing your fingernails vigorously, because we're about to experience a dating disaster like no other!

Red Ryan went with Jenny, even though Elyse picked up a staggering 80% of the vote. Wow, that's some sort of record... anyway, the Post sent them off to a paid meal on Mulberry Street (where they were surrounded by Idahoans being served by Latin Americans working for Jewish owners of restaurants in a place called "Little Italy" - and no, I don't think it makes sense either) where they gathered and had a nice dinner. No sparks flew, but nothing notable happened.

At least that's what Jenny would have you think.

She said:
Of course, I got to the restaurant about half an hour late.

This is about as much as she'll admit in regards to her own foibles, and she even quickly justifies it by saying that she called in advance to let Ryan know. This is forgiveable; remember, we've seen worse from mobbed-up dipshits.

After a few snipes about his fashion sense, we get this:

Ryan had a good conversational manner. He asked a lot of questions - maybe too many!

Well, he's interested in you, so maybe you should appreciate it, eh? I guess she's not feeling the romance. This is probably something she would have appreciated if she liked him. She ends with this:

We certainly talked a lot, but I'm not sure if there were any sparks in my department. I don't really know if we hit it off or not. We may or may not see each other again, I don't know. We did exchange numbers, though.

"Not sure," "I don't really know," "May or may not," and "I don't know." I guess she's not sure of this one.

Oh, but Ryan is quite sure of HIS position!

He said:I got to Grotta Azzura 15 minutes early, and Jenny was 30 minutes late. By the time she got there, I almost felt like I had been on one date already, because I was chatting so much to the bar staff and waitresses!

Granted, I'd normally be calling the hospital right about now to get a WAAAAAAAAmbulance for this guy, but he's justified. Read on:

When she arrived, we had a drink at the bar, and then went and sat down. So far so good. We had delicious food and wine, and I was thinking that she is really nice and that this is all going well for a blind date set up by a newspaper.

Hah! I guess I'm not the only one that thinks a match-up by Tom and Mackenzie doesn't come with high expectations. Anyway:

Then we finished dinner and decided to get a drink somewhere nearby. This is where things started to get interesting.

Interesting! More like miserable! The grimy details:

"...she looked down the street and saw a bar where she said her friend was having a birthday party the next day, so we decided to go and check it out. I ordered some drinks, and then all of a sudden she meets some guy that she knew at the bar. Well, they were just having a great time. She was telling me what a great artist this guy is, and I am like, "Oh, wow, that's great." Then she said that she had to talk to this guy alone. She went off to speak to him in private, while I was left sitting at the bar with this damn 10-buck rose sitting in front of me. This goes on and on for quite some time. "

Ah, sounds like you just got FUCKED, dude. Let's see how this plays out:

Then she comes back and says she is now going to take off with this guy! So I was like, "Oh, right, OK then." And she's meanwhile still telling me what a brilliant artist this guy is. So they walked off, but then she came back and asked if I wanted to go with them. I was thinking, "Not really," but I go out anyway.

Then we get outside, and she said, "Oh, it's a bit late, I am going to go home actually." I asked if she needed me to get her a cab or anything, and she says, "No, no. I am fine." I got the message that she wanted me to go. I said goodnight and I walked off.

But when I got round the corner, I waited a moment, and then turned back and looked back at the bar. Jenny was still sitting there, on the curb. At that point I just kept going - I didn't want to feel like a stalker.

This is just wrong and sad. Initially, it seems he doesn't even get his revenge, but winds up looking pathetic instead:

I ended up at my local bar, Asylum, and I told my friend Brian the bartender all about my date, and he ended up buying me shots all night long. He was very sympathetic about the whole thing.

I told you this guy was a lush! And three cheers for people named Brian! He sounds like a good guy and an excellent bartender. Anyway, here's how Ryan ends the writeup:

So, overall, it was not a good date! And the weird thing is, I chose Jenny because, from her answers, I thought she seemed the most compatible. Well, compatibility sucks. I think I should just go back to choosing on the basis of looks.

And this is where we try not to stare at the carwreck, but we sort of cannot help it.

But, he does get the last word... and it's a good one:

Rating: ZERO HEARTS

Hahahah! I love it! Lesson learned: never act like a bitch on a date with the Post, because Tom and Mackenzie won't hesitate to let your companion rip you to shreds in front of 700,000 Sunday readers. Go Ryan!

As for Jenny, we'll add one further insult: she is now Queen Worst Dater Ever, the II!! That's right, Brooke's off the hook. I think we've reached a low point of clearly bad behavior by a female dater here, even lower than plain old hipster arrogance. As an additional stroke of karma, I'd like to think her artist friend perhaps won't reveal in a timely manner the fact that he's got a nasty case of the crabs. Oops! Feeling a little itchy and scratchy, Jenny?

Okay folks, the worst is over. Next week's daters don't look nearly as bad as last week's date ended up: Our date picker is Dena, who looks pretty clean, happy, and cute. Choice quote:

"I love to dance, but I don't get to do it enough."

Has a potential dater been reading my blog lately? It seems she's heard all of my criticisms about others mentioning activities in their dating profiles that they probably don't pursue nearly as much as they'd want you to believe. Her profile is, overall, well made. She seems like a catch. Let's try to find a good guy for her...

Man #1 is Jonathan the accountant. Highlights: Handsome, confident, and values humor. Also, he'll do your taxes for free. Downsides: Perhaps he's a bit too self-appreciative, he seems more like a nightlife guy than a romantic guy, and he might be more of a boy than a man. Also, he has high standards; Dena's up to the challenge, but her quirkier sensiblities are going to be a turnoff.

Man #2 is Dan the grad student. Highlights: Handsome, confident, and values humor. He will also perform a heart-rending rendition of the theme from "The Facts Of Life". (Mmmmmm, Blair) Downsides: Really loves himself way too much, seems to like nightlife more than dating, and might be more of an ass-tapper than a true Romeo. Do we see a pattern here?

Man #3 is Avi. I've never seen anyone in the telecom industry jacked up out of their minds as much as Avi is. Dena need not worry about ever being trapped under a car or a boulder with Avi around, as he seems he'd pick them up with one hand and roll them away without effort.

What animal do you most resemble, and why? Ha! I'd have to say a monkey. My cousin and I joke that we're the first generation not to drag our knuckles on the ground.

You know, as much as I'd relish the chance to verbally rip apart a random musclehead who might have the power to physically crush me to death - because I am cowardly and jealous, explaining why I have enough time being single to write this pathetic blog - this guy actually endears to me. I gotta say that I like him and his profile. As a big bonus, he doesn't love himself like the other guys do. (Take that in a general sense as well as a comparison to #1 and #2 - many guys in NYC love themselves way too much.) I'll even let go the fact that he misspelled "dinner" - after all, we know it might not be his mistake: Tom, Mackenzie, and all the other Post-bots are fully capable of botching up a profile posting. My only concern about a match with Dena: is she athletic at all? If not, they won't click.

Then again, I'm not sending Dena out with either Jonathan or Dan if someone as cool as Avi is around. So it'll be #3. My fellow readers agree, as Avi is solidly winning the online poll. Happy, happy times await.

Oh, and just in case I didn't make it clear earlier, Jenny sucks. Just had to get one more dig in. Enjoy a long reign, Queen Worst the II. *grin*

New York Post Dating: The Extra-Late, Curled-Up-In-The-Bathroom Edition

2005-06-03T13:31:00.000-07:00

I had something good to write for this week, yet I was felled by a nasty case of food poisoning on Monday and could not find enough resiliance left in my stomach to re-read this week's column (heh) to complete a draft. Not until now, anyway:

Kat from last week went with Sean, the bulky-jawed comedian who reminded me of Jay Leno. Although Sean was perhaps hoping to find some actual romance in the deal, it was not in the cards:

Pretty early in the conversation Kat emphasized that a) she felt kind of weird about going on a blind date, and b) that she was mainly in this whole affair for the free meal.

Ugh. I addressed this problem not too long ago, saying that the "free meal sweepstakes" gets some people thinking that they won a food prize rather than a match setup, and that they're under no obligation whatsoever to even try to like the other person (unless it's some shallowly conceived love-at-first-lusty-glance sort of thing). What these selfish daters fail to realize is that it's only polite to at least put in a 1/2 hour's effort to try to find a connection, or something remotely likeable about the other person.

Wait, how old is Kat again? 23, of course. Ah, those crazy young females. The only times some of the young, snotty types act like they're not bored with men in New York is if they're being treated to a free meal or getting chased by a mugger. To Kat's credit, her politeness extended this far:

As we parted, she said, "Thanks for not being creepy."

Yeah, sure, that setup worked.

Next up, we have Ryan, a 26-year-old digital imaging specialist. He's been around before as a choice of three men - now being recycled as a chooser of women. His profile is alright, as he seems kind of mild and likeable. Only problem is, his face is RED. Can't you guys at the Post do a little digital-imaging-specialist work yourselves and not make it look like he went crazy with cocktails before he took this picture? He looks like he's totally sauced. Eh, nothing ever goes right around here.

And now we have his choices. Let's try to be kind to these women, because life hasn't been kind with me lately (I figured God had it in for me after I've slandered dozens of people in this blog for the past 8-9 months):

Elyse is cute. She likes to be lazy and relax, but she also likes the gym? (Either it's a poor arrangement of words, or she just feels like she wants to go to the gym more often.) Then she labels herself as vivacious and energetic, as "the entertainer". Quite contradictory. Moving forward, she's probably a vegan (most likely explanation for not usually eating butter, as she was forced to do on her worst date) and she'd like to go out more often - which could mean (not necessarily, though) she's hoping someone will come along to pay for entertainment and relieve her of her tight-budgeted Friday nights at home. At first pass, this profile looks harmless, but on closer inspection there are a couple of warning signs. I think the profile needs better shaping, but just in case, I'm being cautious with this one.

Jenny is generally an adventurous person, despite her occasional preference to watch some TV. (Hey, that's perfectly normal and O.K.!) Sometimes, she likes to get crazy and "let lose", which should be spelled with the word "loose" but we'll let it slip. (The spell check key in Microsoft Word, if anyone wants to know, is F7.) I was thrown off by this a little bit:

What's sexy? The simplest things. I like a guy who can go with the flow and doesn't freak out at the littlest things. I like guys with glasses sometimes. A guy who knows how to dance well is important - and I love blonds. And guys that are smart, but not too smart.

She starts off the answer with "the simplest things", but then starts naming specific preferences! Oi! Can't make up our minds, can we? Still, she seems pretty nice, so we'll give her a fair shot in the end - too bad Ryan isn't a blond, though. *sigh*

Finally, we have Leslie. She's a teacher; if you couldn't tell, I always have a soft spot in my heart for teachers (I find the profession lends attractive qualities to the women who pursue it). And she's very cute, too - kind of like a dark-blonde Zooey Deschanel. So adorable! I want to cut and paste most of her profile here because it works so well - she's very down-to-earth and sweet - but I'd leave out one part:

What do you look for in a man? Someone who's funny and playful, liberal and has a good reading voice.

NOOOOOO! Leave the damn politics OUT OF THE PROFILES! That's a mood killer right there for anyone who's not a raving liberal lunatic. And no, I don't care that New York is full of raving liberal lunatics, and that most of them are unapologetic. It's a mistake nonetheless!**

Well, despite some glaring profile mistakes and perhaps a red flag or two, it's not a bad field to choose from this week. I have to go with Leslie, because she doesn't show any personality-related red flags (just a dating profile mishap) and she never specifically rules out guys who have Ryan's dark brown hair color. Easy choice, nothing to drag on about. Still, the voting is going very heavily in favor of Elyse, which is inexplicable considering that the other two are somewhat solid choices and that there's nothing fantastic in Elyse's profile that makes her stand out among other reasonably good choices. I simply don't get it. Maybe we'll figure it out next week.

**The requisite clarification: I'm not being critical of liberals here, even as I'm sort of wisecracking about the strength of the liberal vote in NYC. There's really nothing wrong with any political preference, but there is something wrong with intolerance. When you start putting political signals in your dating profile, it's a clear indicator that you are unwilling to associate with those who don't agree with you politically. That's rather assinine and should be avoided. That said, no specific party affiliation is correct or incorrect; all preferences should be tolerated, and none picked out. Furthermore, feel free to have a good-natured discussion about politics once you're actually on the date.

New York Post Dating: Another Cuba Libre? Or Maybe You Can't Wait To Be Freed From This Date?

2005-05-24T21:43:00.000-07:00

Vikas starts us off:

I definitely thought that Kristen was much better-looking in person than she was in her photograph in the paper.

What the hell is he talking about? She was cute as hell in that photo! Oi.

Well, this week's dating columns are up. Vikas chose Kristen (as you can see), both were sent off to a Cuban restaurant (again, the owner stops by the table during the date... which doesn't usually happen unless you're Donald Trump), and each provided their writeups afterward. By the time I reach his second paragraph I am already baffled. It gets worse, after a review of much praising and happiness:

I think we both had a great time with each other and we exchanged numbers, but I don't know if we will necessarily meet up again.

Hmm, why?

Oh, I see why...

I will admit that I was slightly disturbed that as we were discussing his selection process, Vikas revealed that he didn't read any of our profile descriptions!

Huh? Why would you admit something like that? He's too weird. Also:

Vikas lives in Hoboken, and I am in Washington Heights, and I find it difficult enough to date someone who lives downtown. Jersey may be an impossible proposition.

Arrgh! Don't be hating on Jersey! You know, if you really liked him, the distance to Hoboken wouldn't be a problem. Some long-distance relationships span across countries and oceans, you know! It seems as if that's not the real issue, though. It seems this is a polite rejection, even though it's not entirely respectable to lie about a lack of attraction or romance. I wish people would be direct about such things, even though it's not entirely flattering at times.

Alternately, she looks pretty direct in that picture... Vikas is pouring her more wine, and she's saying, "No thanks!" I guess that answer covered more than just the wine.

Another thing I noticed - I could have sworn that the official rules of the game stated that participants could only be within the five boroughs of NYC... Hoboken is not a borough of New York. Fishy!

I'd say the date went well enough and no one did anything egregiously bad (save for Vikas' admission that the profiles meant nothing to him), but these two aren't compatible and we don't have a match. I told you I had a bad feeling about Vikas. Due to his complete lack of success despite Tom and Mackenzie's generosity, since I've complained about him more than enough here to qualify him for a special title, and since Queen Worst is getting kinda lonely at the bottom, I'm crowning Vikas as King Worst Dater Ever.

Onto this week:

Kat's a young publishing assistant who's social, "perky", and brainy. She likes weekend trips to the country; that sounds rather demanding considering New Yorkers' typical outdoors exposure, unless she'd be willing to accept The Hamptons as country-living.

Who do we have for her? Edward, a man who posesses looks that I cannot speak about - after all, Mamma told me if I don't have anything nice to say... I do have a few nice things to say about his profile, though. He seems to be level-headed, social, and easy-going. He might be the 1,000th guy to claim to be outgoing plus enjoy dancing (hey, did everyone else get some tip book that states you should say those types of things to women?), but I kinda like his personality and he knows how to dress. Kat claimed that looks weren't all that important, so she might be able to enjoy a date with Edward and his gigantic eyebrows. (I had to let at least one wisecrack through - trim those hedges, buddy!)

Next up, Sean's a comedian. He reminds me of another comedian, actually. Who doesn't look at a massive jaw and immediately think, "Jay Leno?" Overall, he's not that bad looking; if anything, he simply has to do something better with those sideburns. (as in chop them off)

How would you describe yourself? Liberal...

Hey, you're a winner! Everyone in New York loves a liberal! (sarcasm detector exploding. Everyone, please leave politics out of dating profiles. Thank you.) Speaking of profile mistakes, here's an example of not- answering-the-question:

What's sexy? Intelligence and beauty are really important, and a woman who has both and knows it - yet is still down to earth - and has a great sense of humor is really sexy.

Intelligence and beauty typically don't matter when the lights are off, so I don't understand this answer. The question asked, "What's sexy," yet this answer seems to go better with, "What are you looking for in a woman overall?" With the certainty of coming across as extremely vulgar, the answer to "What's sexy?" should be more along the lines of, "Tying me to the bed and licking my nutsack." (Yes, I know this is supposed to be a family paper, but no matter - 30 pages ahead of these articles, they're talking about who's doing cocaine off of Lindsay Lohan's inner thigh.) All considered, no one should be answering this question honestly, and it shouldn't be asked in the first place.

...umm, where were we? Oh, I remember now. Well, other than the above, Sean seems alright. I wouldn't fear to send Kat along with him for the night.

Finally, we have Walker, who must be sick of being called "Texas Ranger" by now. He seems to be a bit of a frat boy, and while he's not a bad pick as a guy overall (his profile is alright - it lacks real emotional substance but it's decent anyway), he doesn't seem to mesh well with Kat's agenda. He's a drinker and a partygoer, so Kat's out of luck if she's looking for a reading partner.

Believe it or not, I think Edward has the best potential to make Kat happy. He seems like a mature gentleman who knows how to have fun. Based on some of his profile answers, I think he knows how to treat a lady as well. Kat might like that sort of attention in lieu of being paired with someone who shares many of her interests (because, unfortunately, that someone doesn't exist in our dating column this week). I give him the nod over Sean just barely, and only because I see more of a man's-man hidden inside Edward than I see inside Sean. (Edward does happen to be six years older than Kat, but I'll look the other way for once.) Of course, with this being a popularity contest, and with Walker being handsome and close to Kat's age, guess who's winning the poll? Cripes! Does anyone actually READ before voting? Is everyone just like Vikas?

Eh, see ya next week.

New York Post Dating: Sundays with Tom and Mackenzie

2005-05-16T21:06:00.000-07:00

This week, when first checking out http://www.nypost.com/dating/ (which, I sadly admit, I do on Saturday nights to beat the Sunday press - yes, I've become obsessed with this thing), I discovered that something was terribly amiss. They didn't review Vikas' date! There's a picture of Pamela, our favorite Celine Dion lookalike, on Ian's lap! What's going on here? Did they eliminate the dating column? (I've been living in fear that they will cancel this column before it redeems itself) Who are these people in the picture where Vikas' date review is supposed to be?

Not to worry, folks: this dating column is now one year old, and they're celebrating with a retrospective. Plus, those two people are none other than Tom Sykes and Mackenzie Dawson Parks, who share their thoughts on the dating scene. What did I think after reading it all? It's quite the treat! It's actually mindblowing in a positive way; after all the terrible values I've attributed to this column, this week's retrospective shows that the two people behind it can actually make sense. (You know, when they're not getting the daters' names wrong.) I'm so happy about this that I'm going to turn off my misanthropy for the rest of this writeup.

Let's begin with the retrospective article:

The biggest success was one that I did not predict; the pictured Ian and Pamela. For the record, I picked Ian for Pamela's date setup, but I thought it would be a laughingstock; boy, was I wrong. Apparently, they're quite serious about their relationship. And they look kinda cute together in the picture (a fact all the more impressive considering that the picture was taken in the Meatpacking District - thankfully, no assholes were captured in the frame). Other various successes include: a 6 1/2 hour date, a game of footsie in front of the Post's photographer (who was probably unfazed, considering some of the photo assignments that Page Six must require), and the relief of daters who have just left long term relationships and appreciate the chance to get back into the game. Awww! That's so sweet.

Of course, we haven't been without bumps along the way, and here's some of the more notable ones: a guy who asked for a hotel room to go with the date (sleaze), a picky dater who requires tall Brazillian model doctors (I don't think he made it into the column), a case of food poisoning (aren't talking up the restaurant now, are ya?), a "worst date" that unfortunately didn't involve Queen Worst (although it did sound pretty cold - it must have happened when I took a hiatus in December because of the reindeer-sweater thing; I'll hit the library sometime out of sheer curiosity), and, last but not least, our encounter with Carmine Gotti. I can't possibly overstate how bad of a move it was to set him up on a date for this column, and I believe Tom and Mackenzie agree as they use this retrospective as a chance to take another swipe at his poor manners. Well, enough is enough with the punk-bashing; I won't add to it any further.

Speaking of Tom and Mackenzie:

Tom Sykes is a Brit in his early 30's - and a smart dresser. Sorry ladies, he's married! In addition to lifestyle columns, he also contributes gossip items to the Post. The gossip connection is NOT accidental, as his biggest claim to fame is his family - his sisters are Plum Sykes ("Bergdorf Blondes") along with Lucy and Alice Sykes, all who have made a tear through the New York social scene over the years. They're all rather infamous if you read the gossip columns. (Yes, I do.)

Based on the various things I surmised about him from his other columns, I had him pegged to be a hipster-sympathizing jerk, but the shocker: he's a romantic! He hopes that, someday, one of the set-up couples gets married - how sweet! Also, although he declines to comment specifically on women - which was perhaps gentlemanly, considering what some of them have done on the dates - he has really accurate observations about men's dating habits! Yes, he sold us out, but he was absolutely right. There are sleazes, there are nice guys, and there are studs (or, as he calls them, the Hits). His advice is spot on, and it's exactly what I'd recommend to anyone who's thinking of trying out the New York dating scene.

Still, what the hell is this all about:

(when discussing the Sleazes) Girls, we try to weed these guys out, but a few slip through our net. And hey, they make great Sunday reading for the rest of New York.

Boooo! That's not right. I don't enjoy reading about some awful guy putting his tentacles all over a cute, innocent girl. Get better at screening these guys, buddy. I'll let it slide, though, seeing how Tom is overall a pretty nice guy.

And now, the lovely Mackenzie Dawson Parks - hands off, she's married too! Is she blowing a kiss, or are those duck lips? I'm not trying to make fun - she's quite a cutie. She's definitely the young one of the two (gotta be somewhere between 24-26). Enough swooning over her looks; time to swoon over her dating observations!

I'll agree with what Mackenzie says, with one addition: it mostly applies to WOMEN too. I will not disagree that any of it applies to men, because it does; some know how to really screw up a connection. Women aren't so mercurial post date as men can be - they pretty much know at the end of the date how they're going to feel about the guy. Women, however, can be quite picky, often provide phone numbers when they have no intentions of answering a man's calls, and definitely suffer from NBTS (I identified that effect here in New York over two years ago; it helps to know it's there). Still, I'm amazed - Mackenzie can accurately single out the biggest problems affecting New York daters. I'd recommend her opinions as required reading for all future daters.

While I remain somewhat baffled by some of the editorial decisions (and gaffes) that occur in this column, I'm feeling much more hopeful for the future now that we know something more about the people behind the column. In the end, against my own expectations, I actually LIKE Tom and Mackenzie now that I know some more about them, and about how they view their daters' adventures. I also must admit that there has been improvement in the results of the dates over time, and I expect things to get better in the future.

I'm hoping the Post keeps these two around for one more year... and maybe more. I'm hoping that someday, in the future, I'll find it hard to remember the last time I had to write something awful about this column. And, most of all, I'm hoping that writing about Vikas' date next week is much less painful than I think it'll be. (I guess I'm still not sold on him. Oh well!)

New York Post Dating: Aside From The Insensitive Comments About Religion, We're Not Doing Too Badly

2005-05-08T17:04:00.000-07:00

Here's your weekly link to my favorite subject matter...

Despite my objections, Zoe thought Jay was her best shot at romance. At first glance I wanted to scream, but it seems that Jay is not so bad - perhaps much different than his profile initially suggested. I went back to last weeks' profiles to take a look, and I confirmed this. First of all, his name was Jonathan last week. Good job, Tom & Mackenzie! Second, that was a really bad profile picture - not just giving the appearance that he wasn't quite handsome, but that perhaps he wasn't clean either. I mean, with that hair, and the odd skin tones - who knew when he last bathed? Third, his short answers didn't really work too well, allowing me to make the mistake of making a lot of bad assumptions about his lifestyle - that he might be cheap, poor, or uninteresting.

I went for the worst case scenario when looking at his profile last week. That was a terrible mistake on my part, and I'm sorry that I was such an asshole about it. Readers, you should learn from it - this is the way many people think when they're quickly browsing a profile. It's not unusual for people to make (sometimes unfair) snap judgments on others based on appearance and limited information. It's often unintentional, almost subliminal. There are strategies in composing a dating profile that can ensure you'll make a clear, positive impression based on your interests and values. Jonathan... er, Jay, or whatever his name is... could have missed out on the chance had he been lined up against candidates with better profiles. (He squeaked by because the other guys weren't particularly good choices.) Assuming this dating setup doesn't lead to marriage (we'll get to that in a second), he would benefit from a profile makeover to better highlight his flattering qualities.

Too bad I wouldn't know what they are, because Zoe had too much to drink on the date and can't remember many details about what's-his-name. Never a good move, but he didn't seem to notice. It turned out they were somewhat compatible, even though he's a Gentile (these things matter, people!) and she's really insistent about celebrating her birthday. Oh, that, and Zoe thinks that dating someone who lives 6 miles away might be a bit of a commuting stretch. Is this a red herring for her lack of romantic interest, or is this just hipster subway snobbery? Ah, those wacky 23-year-olds! What a trip they are!

While we're talking about Zoe, I should mention that it was unbecoming of her to go down this road:

I did find the whole Jehovah's Witness thing kind of fascinating, because usually you only meet them when they come to your door and you don't answer.

I'm sure what's-his-name finds those kind of statements charming.

In the end, I'm not too sure what kind of future this couple has, but I'm all for them to continue seeing each other and feel out the situation. I hope Zoe keeps the silly Jehovah's Witness observations to a minimum, though - and, unlike the Post, she should probably always refer to him by his correct name.

Next week's adventure - probably once again set in a restuarant with the tab covered by the Post, featuring undue attention by the restaurant staff (hey, how come the chef never stops by to say hello on any of my dates?) - will feature Vikas, who just a few weeks ago was on the losing end of a strong contest for Pamela's heart (and drink tab). Back then, I was a little curious about whether or not Vikas was heavily ethnicized - that is, if he had a thick foreign accent and/or had a good sense of American culture. To be honest, I still don't know, but I no longer care. For one thing, he has potentially worse issues - I think his pursuits are blandly stated (which means there could be nothing interesting about him at all), and his sense of humor is either corny or arrogant. (I'll give him a bit of a break, though - he works in finance and dresses well! Your dad will approve!) Second, where I thought that ethnicity might hurt his chances with Pamela, I thought that was an issue with Pamela and not Vikas. I don't really see that being a problem with this week's women. Score one for diversity if we can make this thing work out.

Let's talk about this week's women already, because they're so promising - and because I dislike talking about Vikas! (Too bad I gotta write half the column about him next week, too! Please kill me.)

Kristin is a 25 year old teacher, and she's sooo cute! Her profile gets off to a great start:

I'm always up for trying anything new. I enjoy wandering the city, taking dance classes, playing the cello, going to museums, etc.

The cello? I'm swooning so much over that list that I don't want to make the easy "she loves a big instrument" joke. She seems pretty cool based on her total profile - no red flags, much to love about her down-to-earth sensiblities and her approach to dating. Did I mention she's sooo cute? She'd make a great date.

Then again, so would Molly. She's a pretty 29-year-old grad student, looks athletic (and fit), has a good head on her shoulders, and has excellent romantic priorities. Based on the athletic angle, I think Molly would make a better match for Vikas. I do hope that Vikas can handle knitting, though! As an aside, that's a really interesting and creative hobby - I think that's not only a great thing to do, but an excellent thing to mention in a dating profile. I'm also loving the fact that, this week, the ladies' hobbies are "cello" and "knitting", not "getting into Bungalow 8".

Last, we have Agnes. Another cutie! She's a photographer, likes concerts and the beach, and loves exploring the city. She's happy, perky, and smart. She also has good taste in music! (remember, Vikas loves the dated acts U2 and LL Cool J - that might be a miscompatibility, but you never know) I particularly loved this passage:

What has your New York dating experience been like? Wonderful, dreadful, interesting, dangerous, enlightening. I don't regret anything. Everyone I have dated has taught me something about myself and people in general. How could I regret that?

*sigh* Why are you still single? You could probably have a rock star if you wanted, girl. I heart you.

In the end, I think Molly is best with a very slight edge over Kristin and Agnes; in general, I think their particular preferences in humor, demeanor, activities, and romance make them the best possible connection. The poll is still really close among all three girls - because they're all fantastic choices. I do sincerely hope that Vikas is more interesting than his profile initially suggests, because all of these girls deserve to get a shot at an interesting date, not a bomb.

(Of course, being single myself, I'd like to get a shot at being in Vikas' position this week. Can I pick one too?)

New York Post Dating: If Looks Could Kill, This Would Be A Cemetery

2005-05-04T10:08:00.000-07:00

Merrily we roll along
singing a familiar song
The New York Post is always wrong
Tom & Mackenzie must be hitting the bong...

Matt chose Lyla. Bad news, as I predicted? Well, let's see:

...we pulled out all the stops and sent them to the Lower East Side gastronomic temple, Suba... But at the end of the day (or night), well, there's only so much we can do.

Well, that doesn't sound too hopeful now, does it?

Matt's response was rather brief and non-observant - he mentions as much about himself in a few very short paragraphs as he does about Lyla. On the other hand, Lyla has much to say about Matt: that he's a little too hopeful for romance when there pretty much isn't any; that he's "self-important" (when the gesture that triggered that comment might have impressed others); that he drinks too much; and that he's got an ugly goatee. She clearly isn't interested. I think the phone number exchange was a gesture of mercy for our fashionably fallible foodie.

Reservations for Matt, party of one.

What about this week's daters?

Zoe is a pretty grad student who spends time "working out." I had to mention it; I didn't think it was so bad in this context, but I think specificity in athletics is better than admitting you're trying not to be fat. A simple profile mistake. Anyway, aside from providing the first reasonable answer to what I've nicknamed "The Bestiality Question" (there's something about putting yourself in the role of an animal for a matchmaking questionnaire - one of these guys is going to try to sleep with a dolphin? Ewww), her profile is run-of-the-mill, but she comes across as nice and sweet. Curiously, she requires her men know about "sports and cars." Symbolically, she wants a dominant masculine presence - so no metrosexuals! Literally taken, that's rather picky, but I assume that she's not going to quiz anyone on Chad Pennington's passing stats or the 0-60mph of a Lamborghini Gallardo.*

Let's take a look at the three handsome, charming men we've got to pick from.

Erm, I mean, let's take a look at these charming men, even if they're not quite handsome.

Scratch that. Here's the three men:

Andrew's positives are that he's an idealist, and he likes music. That's about it. Well, I'm not an idealist - and so I take issue with his admission to being absent-minded (could have left that out), the apology for being a steak-lover (that was somewhat offensive for vegetarians), ripping of shallow people and hipsters (that's MY job! besides, no place for that in a dating profile), the obvious numbers-game theory (I guess you'll just try to fuck every one of those 5 million until one says yes, right? Okay, maybe that's actually hilarious. heheheh), the weird answer to the dating experience question, and, finally, the Podbragging.

Eugene's best quality is that he would like to attend a classy event sometime. I suppose that's a counterbalance to the complete lack of class that his profile exudes. He might be a nice guy in the end, but his profile says he's a complete animal. He's probably happy about that, but he's not 23 - he's 31. When's this guy gonna settle down? He values social graces, but he also wants a girl who can sit with the guys at the poker table and burp and fart with the rest of them. Contradiction! I figure he has exquisite taste in women and uses the "classy" things to try to balance his party-animal persona; he knows he's shopping out of his league. Zoe's definitely out of his league.

Jonathan is one of those bizarre people that you might run into outside Cooper Union. All his profile statments are rather short; they tell the tale of a young poor East Village hipster who lives the punk rock lifestyle. I thought it was telling that his ideal date would be in the girl's kitchen; it means that he doesn't have food at his own place to cook, he doesn't want her to see his place, and he can't afford a restaurant date. So he's going to raid her fridge to show off his cooking skills, eh? Lame. His eyes creepily remind me of Vincent Gallo. His hair is ridiculous. Zoe will pass.

It seems like Andrew's the winner of this unfortunate masculinity contest. I can't tell if Zoe's going to like him based on his profile alone (the profile, while it could use some work, doesn't reveal any truly horrible flaws), but perhaps they can connect if there's any luck in the world. Zoe really doesn't have much of a choice anyway, does she? The public also solidly chose Andrew over the other two. And so we'll see what happens next week.

* 4.2 seconds

New York Post Dating: Decidedly Not Funny Anymore

2005-04-27T09:06:00.000-07:00

Another week, another review.

Marni chose Ted for her date, and they enjoyed a lovely evening at Havana Alma de Cuba (a place both participants seemed to appreciate). They chatted long into the evening, they both admitted they were flustered to be on a blind date in the public eye (Ted's a schoolteacher, so all of his kids will be asking him, "Did you hit that, Mr T?" in perpetuity), and they both enjoyed each other's company. They seem to want to date again, so I suppose the Post can take credit for a succesful match! And I can whine once again about a lack of comic material!

As a nice touch, they both showed up quite early to the date - unlike other mobbed-out dipshits we've seen here before.

Anyway, onto this week's daters...

Meet Matthew, someone so obsessed with food it rivals the Post's obsession with mentioning the fact. Foodie foodie foodie. Yeah, we get the hint. Matt's pushing 40, so we should be looking at another "mature" date this week (well, maybe not; I know some NYU students who would gladly date him if he'd take them thong shopping). What's he looking for?

When it comes to women, there's nothing more appealing to Matthew than a big smile and confidence - and conversely, "neurotic behavior" doesn't win many points with him.

Well, if we need to avoid neurotic older women, we might have our work cut out for us. Also, here's the response to the often-deadly "worst date" question:

We asked him to tell us what his worst date ever was, but he wasn't divulging much in the way of details "It's really a long story - but let's just say she was hideous, unfriendly, and had no self respect!"

Uh-oh! You must use the rules of job interviewing here - never speak badly about former dates like that! Calling your former dates hideous is going to raise a lot of red flags with your current date. Well, that and vaguely resembling Paul Giamatti. Matt needs an Extreme Queer Makeover, or whatever they call it nowadays.

Matt's a seemingly interesting person otherwise. Who are our matches? Well, let's lead in by saying that no one breaks 35. One of them's 28. I don't know about this...

First, we have Ann, a 33-year-old lawyer. She seems like an awfully nice and interesting person; in no way does she resemble a hard-boiled career woman, as lawyers are often portrayed. (Think of all those smoking-hot ADAs on "Law & Order") She mentions that she likes going out to eat, so that's a sign of compatibility. My only concern:

How would you describe yourself? ... I'm low-maintenance in esthetic ways - i.e., it takes me no time to get ready!

Would a foodie like Matt prefer someone meticulous about such things? Surely there's a logical disconnect in dating someone who took less time to get ready than the chef used to position the carrots on the 4th course. But I won't hold it against her... she seems alright.

Next, Lyla is a PR exec, the closest to Matt's age, and definitely seems neurotic! Wow, she's picky - it's not as if her list of gripes is unreasonable, but she's uncommonly specific - and snarky - about what she is and isn't looking for. Let's run down the list: "funny, independent, smart, worldly, well-traveled... at least 3 inches taller than me", plus no bald guys, no slackers, no smokers, and no mamma's boys. On the plus side, she'd like to explore new restaurants!

Finally, Lauren is 28 to Matt's 49. (I threw on an extra decade for that jacket.) Lauren's interests are very youthful - she's a flirt, she's a drinker, she's high-maintenance, she's a "social butterfly", and she'd love to play mini-golf. Oh dear, this is not going to work out. However, she could always give me a call, as I know where to find a couple of mini-golf courses in the area...

Well, after all of this, the choice is obvious in my eyes: it is Ann. Indeed, she is winning the readers' poll midweek. I don't know if they'll get along (I think it's a longshot), but we did our best to help and that's about all we can do. In the meantime, I'm going to dig out my credit card for a shopping date with a couple of coeds down by University Place...

New York Post Dating: A Snoozer

2005-04-17T21:28:00.000-07:00

I'm not one to shy from being candid, so an upfront admission: this weeks' date writeups bored me to tears. Sorry! Last week's setup turned into this week's agreeable and unremarkable date; this week's setup looks encouraging for romance, bad for sarcastic commentary.

Still, you deserve my response. It's all I can do for you.

Eric chose Jaclyn for this week's date. In a new kick to the dates, the Post is arranging not only for the diners to eat for free, but also for some brief pre-date cooking classes in the kitchen with the chef. This seems to work pretty well, so expect to see more of it. Jaclyn, overall, had a good time and feels comfortable with Eric. On the other hand, Eric is not quite as upbeat about the initial feelings of romance, but still would like to take a wait-and-see approach. I'd rate it a successful date. I just have one concern: I think Eric is definitely way too tied up in his lawyer-type, jet-setting life, and that's a libido killer. Put the goddamn Blackberry away, dude!

This week's date-picker is Marni. Marni is beautiful, vivacious, and magnetizing. And 37 years old. This particular fact contributes two aspects to this setup that are uncommon to this column: we have someone who we can count on to be mature, reasonable, and experienced; in a 37-year-old woman, though, we can also expect a departure from the trendy, fast-paced, hot-and-bothered dating setups that we commonly see here. So what the hell am I supposed to write about? Bring back the 22-year-olds so I can make fun of them!

Marni's got a choice of three age-appropriate guys: Ted the teacher, Rey the accountant, and Bruno the... um, food service manager. That doesn't leave me much to write about, does it? I've kinda soured on Bruno on the first look. Call it a hunch on non-compatibility. Marni wouldn't go wrong with either Ted or Rey, though. I think Rey matches just a bit closer to Marni than Ted, but Ted's convincingly winning the poll on the first day. I think she'll have a good date no matter who she chooses; I also think that I'll be reduced to telling knock-knock jokes just to keep the humor level going around here:

Knock knock!
Who's there?
Don Juan.
Don Juan who?
Betcha I Don Juan to write this column next week if Marni doesn't rate at least three hearts with one of these guys.

*groan*

New York Post Dating: The Bling-Bling Edition

2005-04-13T09:39:00.000-07:00

Want a link to the Post's dating page? Sure you do.

I wasn't too happy with my choices for Pamela's date last week. The people have spoken regardless - Pamela chose Jason, and so did the voters. I'm relieved that they were more decisive than myself.

For the post-date summaries, we'll start with Jason. It seems he is not odd as I originally envisioned him to be. No, he's a typical New York corporate whitebread ex-jock type. He wasn't pretending when he mentioned sports 90 times in his profile - the first thing he brought up on the date was March Madness. That's kind of a risky topic to go for with a girl like Pamela, as I wouldn't have guessed she's a sports fanatic.

Generally, he really didn't have anything interesting to say about the date. They talked about a bunch of boring personal things, and the only highlights are the coincidental connections that they share. I don't think he finds Pamela sexy.

So, what about Pamela? I'll back off, and let her hang herself:

He was tall and cute, wearing a jacket and black pants. He was very nicely dressed. I noticed that Jason had a nice smile and he was tall, definitely taller than me. I would say he was the perfect height - probably 6-foot to my 5-foot-4.

Tall tall tall. That's what Pamela's looking for. That single-minded focus on a physical attribute is a glaring warning sign that Pamela doesn't seek out the best qualities in her partners. Oh, and perfect height? He's got 8 inches on you - that's perfect if you want to be his midget helper.

My first reaction to Jason was very positive. I had based my selection of him on the small photograph of him I was sent - and also on the fact that he works in a similar field to mine.

I left in the part about the job fields just to be fair. Really, she's all about looks. That, and...

Riingo was a great date spot, and the food was spectacular. I had sea bass and Jason ordered Kobe beef.

Oi! This is what happens when the Post pays the bill! Jason noted they had five courses, and now she reveals that they ordered two of the most expensive things on the menu! This is a fantasy date for people who haven't hit 25 yet. Hell, I know people over 30 that can't afford this sort of meal on a regular basis.

We got talking about traveling, Europe and wine over dinner.

Mo' money, mo' money, mo' money! Jason didn't recall any of this. This is perhaps because your typical 24-year-old male doesn't have the pricey taste for these sort of things. Is this what drove Jason away?

At the end of the date, he gave me a big hug goodbye and he also offered to pay for my cab, which I thought was very gentlemanly.

Jason's a gentleman, sure. Of course, this scores double points for Pamela because she's not only looking for a handsome gentleman - she's looking for a handsome gentleman who has mucho dinero and will gladly spend it on her!

Well, what did Pamela actually say about Jason?

The conversation was good. We were talking the whole time and we really had a great connection... I definitely thought Jason was really nice, and at the end of the night he asked me for my number... I'd like to hang out again.

Sure, if he's paying.

This week, we have Eric, a 26-year-old attorney, choosing among three female daters. Can we get through our leading man's profile without finding a fatal flaw or a cliche?

...lists his main interests as going to the gym, exploring the city and "buying things I can't afford and not caring about it."

Perhaps not.

The best part is the Post's response: "We're down with that, Eric." If that doesn't explain my exasperation with this dating column, nothing will.

Just in case we didn't figure out that he's in good shape, he describes himself as athletic shortly thereafter. He dislikes show-offs and snobs - fair enough, except how does this make sense, then?

He's looking for a woman who "thinks of others before she thinks of herself. Oh, and it doesn't hurt if she looks good in a baseball cap and a tight pair of Sevens!"

Sevens, for the fashionably uninitiated, are female designer jeans. You will find many snobby and show-off ladies wearing these jeans, so this makes no sense whatsoever. Beyond that, why the hell does this guy know anything about women's fashion? Something's not right here.

Well, are any of these girls drawing up Lucky Number Seven this week?

Elizabeth, probably not. For starters, she has a child already. That isn't a guaranteed mood killer among all men, but I could see a guy like Eric running far into the distance from that kind of situation. Also, she's older than Eric - not a problem for Eric, but might be for Elizabeth. Another minus: she likes women! Uhhh, wait; she says she'll "always treat a girl like gold," which seems awfully familiar... hey, wait a second! That's Jason's line from last week! Wow, the Post is getting sloppy! Clean up your dating columns, guys! Well, other than that, we know she doesn't like shy men (from her "unattractive" question), and she doesn't go for an aggressive approach from men she doesn't already find attractive (from the "worst date" question). I also think she's pretty. (the picture is botched, though; more on that later)

What about Jaclyn? To start, she's younger (not older) than Eric. They also share something in common - going to the gym! Do they share any other dating profile cliches?

How would you describe yourself? I'd say I'm smart, sarcastic, honest, funny, reliable and kind.

They're not shared cliches, but cliches nonetheless. Everyone would love to say most of these things about themselves. Don't tell us, show us! Other than that, she wants to travel, she wants flowers on the first date, and she wants to eat at a trendy restaurant (and NOT just a movie!). More rich tastes. At least Eric can afford it on a lawyer's salary.

Finally, we have Suzanne. It's the same story as Elizabeth - another botched picture, another girl who's older than the guy, another answer from one of last week's daters accidentally left in there (which is why they asked her about the dating scene TWICE - one of those answers belonged to Vikas from last week). Suzanne is definitely a social butterfly, based on her answers to a couple of these questions; however, we don't have much to work with here for personality and romantic insight. I can't rate her a strong pick based on the vague profile, but at least I can't rule her out either.

Note about the pictures: There's something terrible about all of them this week. They're very shadowy, and they aren't very kind to the ladies' skin tones. I consider that to be a ghastly mistake for a dating column. Jaclyn's picture came out the best of the three; Elizabeth and Suzanne, however, simply don't look right. They're all rather lovely ladies, so this is quite unfortunate. I'd sue the photographer. (Maybe that could be the second date; remember, Eric's a lawyer!)

Who do I choose? Whoever I think would look the best in Seven Jeans! That's probably Suzanne; Elizabeth had a kid so designer jeans are a risk, and Jaclyn looks a little softer than Suzanne. It's really a close call. Jaclyn's winning the voting (must be because of the botched pictures), but it's not by a large margin as the other two are definitely in the hunt. In any case, we'll find out next week who gets picked!

New York Post Dating: That's (not quite) Amore!

2005-04-04T10:55:00.000-07:00

On our last episode of "Desperate Murdochs" (could there be any other justification for the turns this column has been taking?), Carmine Gotti - son of Victoria, grandson of John, and complete idiot - was gifted with the choice of three young misses to take on an all-expenses-paid date somewhere in Manhattan.

Don't you want to know what happened?

First, not like it mattered, but he picked Gina. She's young, rather stupid looking, and attempting (but not quite achieving) a hot look - just like her suitor. This similarity made no difference, as the date was a bomb. Hey, Tom and Mackenzie, what happened to your swagger? Can't really talk yourselves up in the opening paragraph when the first thing you have to reveal is that your boneheaded golden boy cancelled the original date, yeah? Indeed, folks, he forgot to tell everyone that he'd be on vacation in the Bahamas... and decided to let Tom, Mackenzie, and Gina know only a few hours ahead of time. What a dope! If that wasn't bad enough, he showed up late at Vento for the rescheduled date!

Let's take a break to evaluate the daters' photograph: Gina definitely looks like she takes all the perks of working at a tanning salon, because she makes Halle Berry look like Macaulay Culkin. And then there's Carmine - that idiotic smile, that ridiculous earring, the gravity-defying hair. Surely, there are no two people who could make an uglier couple. But, their tans match!

Back to the date - Carmine uses the Yankees to make mention of his grandfather, lest we forget who he is (or who he had rubbed out). They seemed to like each other, but they can't quite remember much about what they discussed. I guess that's what happens when mindless banter is the conversation of the day! Carmine, it seems, likes to do a lot of talking about himself. I'm not sure how much talking Gina did, but perhaps she made a noble attempt to keep up her end of the conversation. There's little attraction here; you can tell both daters were just trying not to say anything bad about the other one. Carmine didn't even give Gina his phone number! What a doofus.

I might note they gave each other three hearts. What's that supposed to mean? Four hearts is the top ranking - how can you give three if you don't even exchange phone numbers? Keep this in mind for the future, as I'm hoping someday we see the elusive one-heart ranking. I'm assuming that's what you get if you unexpectedly vomit on your date, or make an unwelcome, aggressive sexual move.

Anyway, onto this week's date! We've seen Pamela before, and we've seen the old cut-off-at-the-boobs portraits before, too! Pamela's got "something to grab onto" (in male parlance) for the guys who like that sort of thing. I must say, she's quite fetching with her green eyes, cute face, lovely red hair, and luscious lips. Pamela seems to be rather particular about her men - "tall, dark, and handsome;" "he has to treat me right!;" "not interested in meeting anyone who 'can't have a conversation about anything other than himself.'" She hints indirectly that she's used to dating rich guys - that might be either a lofty expectation or a personal exaggeration. Either way, she definitely has pricey tastes. I'm hopeful but cautious about her potential for a match. Who are our leading men?

Jason assures us that he's "very outgoing." Oh, and he claims he's "funny" and he looks older than he really is. And he enjoys working out. Riiiiiiight. Take all of that with a grain of salt. The only interesting thing he mentions is the hot tamale underwear. I'm not sure whether he's a sports addict or a wannabe, but athleticism sure does come up quite a few times in his profile.

I wanted to like Ryan better, but I can't. In the end, it's the same trying-too-hard, pat-myself-on-the-back crap. That, and he repeats that "I can't stand women who think and act that they are better than others" line, which didn't need repeating. His choice in music dates back 10 years ago. He likes golf. He's a cracker. Nothing exciting here. Next!

Hmmm, Vikas at first glance is definitely NOT a cracker! But here's another guy who likes "working out" (twice). He names U2 and LL Cool J as musical favorites (both peaked in 1986). In the end, he fails to mention anything endearing. What I can't figure out is if he's Americanized or ethnicized... perhaps he's been completely assimilated into mainstream American culture (which means future dates at Red Lobster), or, based on his responses, he's an ethnic Indian caricature like Kal Penn ("Harold & Kumar", "Van Wilder"). Surely the latter would be much funnier, especially in light of Vikas' "body of a god" sense of humor. Stereotyping? Me? I don't care, as I'm going to hell anyway. Why don't you join me?

Ryan seems the most normal of the three. There's something rather odd about Jason that I can't put my finger on. Vikas seems foreign-born, and I don't think Pamela matches well with that type. (a tangent: New York is very diverse, and we shold be seeing daters who are compatible with exploring new cultures. This parade of 22-year-old ditzy white girls doesn't quite fit that ideal.) The poll results are surprising early in the week: Jason's got nearly 70% of the votes, beating the other two guys by a significant margin. Whatever the choice, I have a feeling there will be no hanky-panky going on after this date!

TTFN, ta-ta for now!

New York Post Dating: Who wants to be a Comare?

2005-03-27T17:41:00.000-08:00

Link to this week's (highly recommended) dating mainpage...

Sequence of events leading up to this week's date:

Lev gets the choice of Youri, Jen, and Jamie.
I write my column, bashing Youri and Jen (I'm sorry, I can't leave innocent people alone) and recommend Jamie.
The public votes, leading to the following tossup in the polls: Jen, 37%; Jamie, 32%; Youri, 31%. That's the closest vote among 3 daters I've seen.
Weirdly, on Saturday night, Jamie was removed from the page and not on the voting list. This suggested that Jamie didn't go on the date. I experience disappointment, knowing one of other two inferior girls would be picked.
Sunday, I find out I'm correct: Youri was chosen.

I'm not one to pull any punches when someone visually disturbs me, so allow me to speak my mind: I feel like Youri is going to kill me in my sleep. Like an evil clown would. It's harsh, I know, and I admit that I can't put my finger on it. What is it about her? Is it her cheeks, her nose, her jawline, her smile, her makeup, her hair, her eyes? I cannot tell. Some combination of those traits leads to a result that resembles a caricature. I'm restraining myself, avoiding harsher adjectives and comparisons. Besides, why suggest that Youri needs a makeover when I've already established her personality flaws? That's more important, I think.

Quickly reviewing the date: it didn't work! *gasp!* The streak is broken! So sad... yet, a welcome relief from the cocky talk that preceded the last few dating columns. Highlights: Youri made a big deal about the fact that Lev went casual, because she apparently doesn't like being the only one wearing uncomfortable clothing on a date (dumbass); Youri did most of the talking (no surprise); and, most fun, the Post sent these two to The Mermaid Inn, a seafood restaurant, when Lev is allergic to shellfish! D'oh! (That would be quite a low mark for this column: someone dies)

Officially announced this week, but obvious to anyone who pays attention: the cost of the meals are comped by the hosting restaurant. This hurts the integrity of the dates in several ways: the rave reviews by the daters are indeed contrived and insincere (given the circumstances, I'm sure no one will say "geez, that meal was crap"); worse, the daters see this as the free meal sweepstakes, which means both daters can, and often do, treat the occasion as a no-pressure joke. Even as there are some advantages to all involved for this setup (low pressure is a great thing for a first date), the integrity of both the date and the column are out the window.

I'll add that paying the costs on a date is a major issue for daters - and I'm not sure it's a good thing to put that issue off until future dates. For example, a lot of guys will offer to split the bill for casual dates, and some girls don't like that - boorish of the ladies, and unfortunate for romance. On the other hand, some men will insist on paying the entire bill, but will also steer clear of anything too pricey - and cheap dates can be a turnoff. Some women in NYC know to hold out for investment bankers who can afford to whisk them away on a weekly culinary tour of the trendy Manhattan dining scene. There are broke men who can't pay, exceedingly cheap men who won't pay, broke women who are greedy and ask for extras, and other generally undesirable people who will be revealed upon the opening of the register. This is a complicated and prominent romantic problem, and I'm not sure if it's wise to factor it out of a blind date scenario. It's certainly nice of the Post to grab the check now, but what happens on date number two? If the arrival of the check is a serious issue for a real date, can we call it a real date if there's no check?

Moving along to next week's date, Carmine is 19 and...

Carmine Gotti Agnello? Carmine fucking Gotti?

I don't even know where to start. Pretty boy. Looks like a greasy punk chump. Reality TV star. Grandson of a notorious murdering mobster, yet not even worthy of the family name. If we're going to make this column a farce and bring in a celebrity, could we choose someone other than a basic cable reject, spoiled brat and heir to blood money? I don't need to tell you this guy has no redeeming qualities, right?

I've gone on too long already, so why even review his choices? Okay, I'll do it: three college-age groupies, review done. I chose Cheryl, who's making a serious run to get her picture under the definion of "vapid" in the dictionary (more so than the other two). She leads the voting; for the rest of us, no one wins.

New York Post Dating: Like seafood? Try the red snapper

2005-03-20T21:57:00.000-08:00

Last week, we left off with Phyllis needing to choose among three guys. I wasn't too fond of Phyllis based on her dating profile, and I didn't think any of the guys were a particularly good match for her. I picked Dan, who I thought would be the best dating candidate not because he was a good find (he is), but because I thought he'd be intolerant of any bullshit on the date - and the result would be entertaining. Fast forward to this week's Meet Market column, and we see that Phyllis chose Neil, who I ruled out because I didn't think he'd find Phyllis to be his cup of tea.

Well, he must have lied about the makeup thing, because he definitely found her to be a good catch. (And she definitely wore a lot of makeup on the date) He found her to be easygoing - something I wouldn't have expected based on her admission that she feels the need to play games. They babbled on for a few hours over seafood at Ocean 50 and then carried things along to Pianos, everyone's favorite hipster hellhole. Have I mentioned yet that he's a screaming metrosexual? Or that he gives off signals that any cute girl in a trendy outfit would keep him happy enough?

I wish I had more to say, based on the hearts given (a lot) and the sanguine evaluations, but that's all there is. Really. They just did a lot of talking. They don't even recall what they said, or if anything stood out. Can I be a grinch and say that there's nothing here except two people who know when to cut themselves off in the middle of a soliloquy, such that both people feel like they're talking enough throughout the night? That's what you'll find in a lot of people nowadays: they like talking to themselves, about themselves, in front of a member of the opposite sex so that they don't feel lonely doing it - and so that they have a flimsy excuse for having sex with that person.

Speaking of people talking about themselves:

We thought Phyllis, 23, a pretty publicist with a passion for life, had made a smart move when she opted for Neil, a 26-year-old in corporate development. Were we right? Well, of course we were.

I'll give them enough credit by saying that their record has actually been pretty good since they stopped sending people to movie premieres and sex plays. We'll forget the frequent mismatches, awful dating venues, match candidates seemingly from outer space, and terrible profiles/photographs which used to be the norm leading up to a month ago. They've finally hit a success streak where they match a trendy girl to a casual, decent-looking guy, and somehow everything works without the girl aggravating the hell out of her date or making harsh judgements about the guy's manners/bank account/looks. If you had told me the column was lying for the past four weeks and each date ended on one of those crash-landing results, I'd believe it. Either the authors have found a truckload of mellowed-out girls to put in the column, or they're just having amazing luck.

Enough with the blabber, onto this week's matchup: Lev is the guy picking one of three girls for a date (+ restaurant review). He has normal interests, has a sense of humor, looks handsome enough, has reasonable expectations for a potential dater, and doesn't give any warning signs. Okay, maybe there's just ONE warning sign: he likes heckling at sports events. I personally might enjoy that sort of thing in a friend (seriously, there's nothing better than a good heckler at a sports game), but that might be something girls aren't interested in. In any case, at least we know he has a passion for sports, hence we should rule out any girls that seem uppity about male interests; you know, like Queen Worst.

His choices:

Youri scares me. In a lot of ways. I don't want to write a page about how she's flunked miserably here, so I'll quickly summarize: people consider her "obnoxious" by her own admission; she's been on "a million dates", also self-indicated; and although she doesn't have an iPod (you know, that $400 music player toy), she brags about the fact that she'll buy one soon. Umm, no, I won't be taking this one home to Mom anytime soon.

Jennifer seems a bit better. That is, if you only read the first and last questions. She has little time for a relationship, and her worst date story reveals that not only committed a cardinal dating sin once, but that she doesn't even really take the blame for it. ("I made plans with a man a week in advance and didn't get a call to confirm." Buy a fuckin calendar, lady!) I'm not down with this one either.

This leaves us with Jaime, and since we're down to the end, I'll try not to nitpick:

What's not sexy? Arrogance.

Good answer! Forget the rest, I give my stamp of approval.

At this early stage of the polling, Jennifer's got a slight lead over Jaime - but it's close. Youri is far behind. Lev has the final say no matter what, and I think he's going to see that Jaime's a nice girl and a safe bet. If he's a poor judge of character, he might go for Jennifer. I hope not. After all, somewhere in my rotten soul, a soft spot wants to see the winning streak keep going.

Catch ya next week.

NY Post Dating Bonus: Dating Up, Dumbing Down

2005-03-17T06:36:00.000-08:00

HOW TO DATE FOR FUN AND PROFIT (March 17, 2005)

This article, written by a familiar face (Mackenzie Dawson Parks), is little more than a cheap advertisement for a dating book by Leil Lowndes. No, I'm not going to mention the book by name, because that would be even more cheap advertising! The book is about shooting for the moon on the dating scene. An example quote from the story:

Lowndes contends that daters should forget about "peasants" and set their sights on "royals" — individuals who have a combination of money, charm, intellect and stability.

*barf*

Hear that, all you peasants out there? Just kill yourselves on Darwin's altar already. You've been forgotten by all the readers in the Post.

Sample tips:

* THINK LIKE A HORSE TRADER ("Recognize that people have a "value" and a "price."")
* CHANGE YOUR LOOK ("Isn't this faking it? Yes, but it's for a good cause")
* DITCH YOUR APARTMENT

About the only sensible tip in the entire article is "Don't wear glitter." I'll second that motion; I wouldn't advise that you in any way dress up like it's 3rd-grade Halloween. That said, the rest of this article is trash.

I almost feel like writing a letter to the Post on this one, reminding them that they're not addressing their readers anymore. Articles like this are made for people dumb enough to think this way, who often do not or cannot read. Meanwhile, everyone else must stand the indignity of a 25-cent newspaper (any cheaper would be free!) telling them that they need to find a partner with more money - implying that they don't already have enough.

You're right, I do need more money - so I can buy the Times instead of this crap.

New York Post Dating: Motion Sustained

2005-03-15T07:43:00.000-08:00

Our weekly pointer to the Dating section...

Matt, sharp as a dagger, chose Sarah. Voting ended up roughly where I found it on Thursday (with Pam giving a respectable second place, and Alicia picking up table scraps).

We sent them to Rosa Mexicano on 62nd Street at Lincoln Center, hoping they would come out of the date with a contract for love. Did our crafty plan work?

Crafty plan? Which part is the crafty part, your conspicuous ad for Rosa Mexicano, or the fact that you're pairing off two people with something remotely in common (for a change)? Seeing the words "our crafty plan" in the New York Post provided a hearty laugh. It's possible that crafty is referring to arts and crafts; I get the feeling that they're sniffing large quantities of glue.

Sarah's view on the evening is very much fair, although Matt got called out for using "hair products." Heh. She isn't bowled over by him, but she likes him and even is considerate of differences in opinion. She took sharp notice of the fact that he's a Republican, as she's an active Democrat. Matt seemed a little less enthusiastic about Sarah in his take on the evening; oddly enough, he gave her a higher rating than she gave to him for the date.

They both seemed to have fun, but they haven't found burning chemistry yet. That's quite fine, and I think they should continue dating regardless. They both enjoyed the evening, and I think they have potential.

I had a hard time trying to make sense of things this week. Unlike in previous weeks, when the daters' evaluations have usually made sense as a whole, it seems as if both daters were given a Q&A session and the answers were clumsily placed together without the questions. As a result, it was a bit confusing to read their opinions. One can easily surmise that they were both bored on this date and are looking for something more exciting. The generally high ratings are a surprise in context of the responses. In spite of this, I find that these two have much in common where it counts, and time may lead to a fruitful romance for these two.

------------

Feeling rosy and warm with love? Don't get used to it.

This week's date picker is Phyllis. She's 23 and she's wearing a blazer, a lace camisole, and pearls - and a lot of makeup. Who do you think this reminds me of? Arrgh!

"I'd describe myself as a firecracker - full of life and personality," she tells us. "I'm sharp as a whip, and I say what's on my mind...oh, and I'm pretty cute, too!"

She's quite young and definitely bold, but is there anything redeeming about her?

She also looks for a guy who is intelligent and well-dressed. Affectionate men who are close to their families - "as close as I am to mine" - will score major points as well.

That's not so bad. Still, this is all you need to know about Phyllis:

Phyllis admits that she enjoys the "thrill of the chase" in dating - that said, "I imagine when I find the right guy, I won't feel the need to play games."

So, fair advice to whoever gets selected for this date: fire and retreat. She's certainly attractive and enjoys dating (as well as the amorous stuff that comes with it, likely), but she'd make a horrible girlfriend. So, go for the amorous stuff ASAP, then get the hell out of there. Don't feel bad, either; after all, you'll have satisfied her "thrill of the chase".

Blech. Rarely have I given up at this point in the matching process, but I'm almost inclined not to even look at the guys. Still:

Rob, in full Nosferatu getup. (Dude, get out in the sun a bit more often) Honest to a fault. Party guy. He likes intense women; he likes sincere women; he likes it when a girl has a slight nerd quality. I just don't see a match, but he provides a great quote:

What's not sexy? Willful ignorance.

Amen, brother! I take this as a swipe at "Girls who don't answer their voicemails when they don't feel like dating a guy anymore." That's a well-deserved stab. And Phyllis probably does shit like that. Next!

Neil is listed as 26, looks 30+. He works in Corporate Development, which means he probably should avoid talking about work forever. Not that I dislike him, but the guy seems about as uninteresting as his job. Here's the deciding line:

I'm not into girls who wear tons of makeup.

And you're out. Next!

Dan's a beefy financial manager, not a pretty young boy. He seems much more interesting than the other two, though. When he describes himself, there's a sense of honesty and sincerity in his words, as if he's not faking it for a dating profile; you'd want to talk to him about his interests. Hell, I think I wanna be friends with this guy and buy him a few rounds. (Wait a sec - this is starting to sound like I'm turning gay. I better quit now.) I think he's definitely looking for the right things in life, and he's a great dating candidate for the right girl. Ah, the tragedy - if he gets picked, he's going to end up with Phyllis!

So much for the rosy feeling. Although these guys aren't so bad (unlike some picks in recent memory), I just feel terrible about having to pair any of them up with Phyllis.

In light of this dilemma, I'm going to do what I always do when I'm terribly vexed: I'll put on my evil mask and try to go for the worst (and most amusing) result! Among all of these guys, Dan's great with words, and he's the one who would probably look most unfavorably upon bullshit out of any of these guys. Sure, some guys talk a good game, but Dan looks like he'd back it up. Most likely, his review of Phyllis will be merciless! Yay!

Dan's winning the voting, but I assume that the voters aren't all jerks like I am. See you next week! *giggle*

New York Post Dating: The Power Of Love!

2005-03-10T22:57:00.000-08:00

I know I'm really late this week. Here's the link, which expires soon (so hurry!), but since many may not make it in time, I'll make an extra effort to make it up to you with details.

Celine Dion went with Ian for the date choice, and guess what - she's not Canadian, she's Belgian. Hey, this author is Belgian too! I like her already! You know, except for that goddamn Titanic song.

Anyway, Pamel... whoops, almost slipped up there, I meant Celine... met Ian down at the Silverleaf Tavern for some drinks and dinner, and they immediately started slobbering over one another. I mean, in their writeups, not on the date. Well, they almost did in real life, seemingly. Anyway, the feedback, with all the irrelevant parts cut:

Ian -

I sat down at the bar, trying to get into the proper "Blind Date" zone - i.e., minimal expectations mixed with high hopes... I made small talk with the female bartender to take my mind off the insanity inherent in blind dating... Pamela walked in fashionably late... I usually don't date Europeans as a rule, but Pamela seemed a great exception... I had Pamela sitting in my lap within the first 20 minutes of meeting her. Talk about a great icebreaker!... it felt like total synchronicity. We were even dressed in the same colors!... Pamela told me all about her television show and the fact that she could speak four languages... We closed the place down. I walked Pamela to her front door... and ended the evening with a kiss on the cheek. Pamela is an amazing woman, and I look forward to seeing her again. Thanks, New York Post.

Celine -

We had a fabulous time, because we complemented each other on everything. For instance, I was saying that I wanted to go to China, and he had been there; he wants to go to Japan, and I had been there... It was snowing outside, which was really romantic... within five minutes of being with Ian, I felt a connection... He showed a genuine interest in what I had to say, and he was able to develop a conversation so well. And he looks pretty good, too - that helps!... We talked about everything from past relationships ... I always think it is important to talk about relationships because that is how you get to find out how the other person approaches it... I don't really do the whole "dating" thing... I am always interested in a good conversation and New York is the best place for that. It's so cosmopolitan and you meet people who make things happen... it was just tremendous fun to chat to this great guy for four hours straight.

That was almost, but not quite, thoroughly unbearable. I have a pressing question: how did the both of them make so many mistakes and yet come out of the date adoring one another? They were talking about prior relationships, Celine did a lot more talking about herself than she picked up details from Ian, they basically babbled on mindlessly for four hours (a typical friendzone trap), Celine doesn't typically date, and Ian never met a woman he didn't like. Yet they still gave each other four hearts. And they're continuing to see each other, so their hearts will go on.

Let's move on.

Matt looks alright. The shirt is way too big, though. He's a law student from Long Island who likes jogging (much better than saying "I work out") and time spent with friends. He does use a cliche, but then immediately apologizes. Well, at least he knows. He's got high expectations in a female; he's looking for a brainy attractive gal with a sense of humor.

He's been checking out the New York dating scene lately, and isn't quite sure what to think of it "I think it's kind of sad and unfortunate, given how many talented people there are living in this city," he tells us. "Then again, the fact that I'm in The Post does not speak well for myself."

Best! soundbite! ever! Yes, the NYC dating scene is a tragedy! And being referenced in the Post is ignominious! How honest and succinct! We gotta get you laid, dude.

Pamela is 22 and has fire hair and green eyes. Oooh. In that case, maybe I'll overlook the possibility that her portrait is cut off at just the right spot to hide a huge flabby belly and thunder thighs; and she alludes to that fact in her profile, too! But don't listen to my opinion, please. If Matt likes that sort of thing - and he never said he didn't - then there's no problem, right? Her profile otherwise reveals a fun, likeable person who doesn't seem to have any screws loose. She's got pricey tastes, but Matt's gonna be a lawyer so that's no problem.

Can we top Pamela? Yes! Sarah is a very cute law student. Hey, Matt's a law student too! Can they copy each other's homework? That would be romantic! She's from Texas (giddy up), she insists on Coors Light, she's adventurous and ambitious without being arrogant, and she does karaoke. Down to earth, sweet, and very likeable. Matt, take Pamela and leave Sarah for me... I'll be a good wingman, I promise. *wink*

We've still got one more - Alisha the web manager. She's been doing it since the age of 15 (so she started in 1996, when it was a young, small industry - a workaholic, perhaps). For some reason, she stumbles on the "best date ever" question, making it look like she's never had a good date or doesn't like to talk about past experience. I think she's likeable otherwise, even if not that interesting, but...

... in this tough field, Sarah stands head and shoulders above the rest. In the voting, Sarah has a comfortable lead over Pamela, who has a respectable percentage of the voting herself. Alisha just didn't light anyone's fires. I like Sarah and Matt as a couple; let's see if they can keep the success streak going.

Enjoy the weekend, folks...

New York Post Dating: Now With More Ugly!

2005-02-28T12:40:00.000-08:00

Our action starts here...

Josh, our loveable computer consultant and hunk of Grade A beef, chose Lisa, our user-approved (poll-winning) female matchup. They were sent off to Raga, some restaurant that gets approval from at least one the daters. (not to say that I found Lisa's endorsement entirely convincing... wait a minute, we're supposed to talk about the daters! Fuck the restaurant!)

Summary: Josh and Lisa had a cool date, but don't match together as well as one would hope. I observed that they both conducted themselves acceptably - although Josh was a bit clumsy, with his smoke break and stubborn outlook on theater. A relationship is a no-go; I'd be surprised even if they remained friends. (the sticking points were things they didn't have in common; what are they going to do, keep dating and being nice to one another?) In the end, neither of them are poison in the dating pool; Lisa deserves a great guy, and Josh, perhaps after a little polish and confidence (maybe he could hire Hitch?) and maybe after quitting smoking (sheesh, haven't we learned anything by now?), should pick himself up and find another one. They're both nice, interesting people and I wish them the best.

------------

So much for a matchmaking column. What are we, 2 for 15 now since I've started tracking? Aye carumba! I think if Isiah Thomas was half as good as a matchmaker as he is a general manager, he'd have a better record than this! But at least Tom and Mackenzie are giving me a weekly distraction from the Knicks right now (God bless the two of you for that), so let's continue and hope for the best with our next matchup:

Oh no, it's Celine Dion! She's wearing neck-stretching African tribal jewelery, too! Is Celine wearing a blazer? You know how I feel about people wearing blazers! (I'll let it slide, Celine. It's a good look for you. Any more reminders of Queen Worst, however, and you're going to suffer major point deductions, okay?) Pamela's answers even remind me of things Celine Dion would say in an interview:

Pamela is looking for someone with a generous smile and a great sense of humor; someone who is "intelligent, but without showing off; who can really love a woman and know how to celebrate her."

The only part that doesn't fit in the equation is her profession as a television producer and writer; she seems to have a gentle personality and soft features (vegetarian, yoga enthusiast), but from what I understand, you need to be a shark to get by in that industry. Also, a big warning sign: I decoded her answers to read, "My dreams, love me, celebrate me, I dislike when you don't hear me, looking for a man who knows how to treat a lady." Sounds like a diva!

(and no, I won't get over the Celine Dion thing, I'll be calling her Celine next week too)

So who's up for the role of "Really Creepy Old Guy Manager/Husband?" (note: this is where it gets really fun)

Jacob is a 32 year old ugly law student. I can't accurately describe him, except that his combination of fair-freckled skin, reddish hair, big ears, and squinty black bead eyes is far outside my definition of "handsome." Quotables:

When I'm not in school, I enjoy working out at Equinox, listening to '80s hits, hanging out with my friends and tango dancing.

Every guy enjoys working out, Mr. Cliche. Listening to 80's music makes you either a nerd, a cocaine addict, or gay. And, tango dancing? (I HATE it when people list dancing as a "like-to-do" thing in a dating profile - chances are, you don't dance one goddamn bit when you're not out with a willing date!) The part about being ADD plus being patient makes me think he's trying too hard to be agreeable. His definition of sexy makes him sound like either a pervert or a frequent strip club patron. All in all, he's a risk.

Ian is a 34 year old ugly filmmaker. His looks are barely reminiscient of Eric McCormack, except Eric is a finely polished gem of a pretty boy and Ian is a rough cut. He buries himself with the dating history answer. His answer to "What's not sexy?" ("Toxicity, messy drunks, bad teeth and insecurity.") makes me think he's a magnet to those types of girls, never a good sign. The question about animal resemblance - umm, I think The Post should deep-six that question once and for all because I've never seen a good answer to it. He claims he had a bad date with a girl who had colitis - hey, buddy, if you made her colon swollen, I think you did something right! (ba dum ching!) Ian's another guy whose answers reveal a boring person trying extra hard to land someone nice. I give him a few points on top of Jacob; let's check out the third guy.

(one look at Stephen) HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Holy shit, he comes off like someone you'd meet at the bar in a Tokyo hotel. Karaoke, anyone?
No, I'm not racist. It's just that, between the Asian businessman getup and the dull answers, he looks more like a NYC tourist than a resident. So lame!

What three things can you not live without? My Internet connection, money and a friend.

I'm not going to even go into the possibilities from that answer - they range from boring to creepy. He set a new low for the "worst date" answer in admitting weakness. Are they really that desperate for male daters such that someone with a profile this bad gets approved? This guy REALLY needs a visit from Hitch. Out.

I choose Ian. He seems to be the least bumbling of the three. Most of the readers agree, as he's leading so far in the polls that it makes Reagan/Mondale look like a fair fight. In any case, it's going to be one comical date! (*giggle!*) See you next week!

New York Post Dating: It's Not A Bad Thing When I'm Wrong

2005-02-23T08:36:00.000-08:00

I link, because I care.

Kristen went for Mike. Yay! (The voting was pretty close, too - relatively speaking). Our Zagat-approved restaurant of the week: Gustavino's. Mike found Kristen to be more than palatable. Kristen found Mike to be appetizing. The seafood was well enjoyed. The conversation was four star. The connection was worth 6 1/2 hearts between them. They both conducted themselves handsomely on the date (extra props to them for ending the date pleasant and G-rated) and would each like to continue dating. Oh, merry, merry love!

In retrospect, I was generally wrong to be so harsh on Kristin. True, her personality does contain bold strokes of "super-talkative" and "self-obsessed*," things I consider to be huge warning signs for a psychotic ending; but there are some guys out there who are focused on other factors. Like intelligence. Energy. Tits and ass. Mike has everything he needs in Kristin. If Kristin wants to talk for 3 hours straight self-deprecatingly about how she talks way too much, Mike's not unhappy. He finds her charming regardless. Plus, Kristin finds it charming that Mike is intelligent and energetic enough to keep up with her. I've also observed that both of them are generally honest and do not have awful personality flaws that came across in their descriptions and reviews. I think this is one of the best connections I've reviewed.

*(self-obsessed is not to be confused with narcissistic or self-absorbed; self-obsessed doesn't mean that you love yourself too much like Brooke, it just means that you tend to think too much about what's going on in your own life. It's not a sin, it's merely an indulgence. And an often-tolerated one in New York.)

------------

So, we've had a good connection, there was no sexual theater performance involved on behalf of the Post, and I was wrong for being pessimistic. Satan's packing snowballs, people. Will Cupid reign another week, or will hell get hotter than ever?

Our boy of the week is Josh. I like Josh. And he looks familiar - seems I liked him back then, too. He seems like an honest, intelligent guy. Only one warning sign:

"I don't think people are able to 'look' for people anymore - you just have to get really lucky to meet someone special... I don't find one-sided conversations all that exciting."

Does this hint at a sign of being jaded in the dating pool? (I mean, I am, and I couldn't have said it better...) That's a bias best left at home during a blind date.

A sign of good fortune: all of the match girls are at least age appropriate! The last time Josh (33 years old) was here, his potential match was a 22-year-old. Are Tom and Mackenzie getting better at this matchmaking thing? I think so:

Dido, 32, accountant. She has pretty nice things to say about herself without seeming totally conceited. She makes it through the worst date question just fine. Other than comparing herself to a dog, she looks alright - not too exciting, I admit, but not someone to rule out quite yet.

Lisa, 27, project manager. Now we're talking. She's definitely energetic. Despite a near self-prescripton for a straitjacket:

How would you describe yourself? Hmmm. How to describe myself when I can be someone very different every day?

I've decided that this one is a keeper on one condition: Josh needs to be tall or else the connection is out the window. Other than that, my biggest concern with Lisa and Josh: she might have expectations for someone who is energetic and well-tuned to her "whoop it up!" style. I cannot tell if Josh fits that profile, although I'd lean to the opinion that he's not.

Last, we have Erin, 27, a writer. Southern belle? Whale? Trivial Pursuit? She's a seemingly nice girl, but she's not giving off a hottie vibe. She looks merely honest and quirky. Of note, she manages to deal with her worst date answer acceptably. Otherwise, nothing exciting here; good competition for Dido, but overshadowed by Lisa in both looks and energy.

My pick? This is tough. While I think Josh, meeting certain conditions, would have a nice date with all three of these girls, there are things we don't know about each of these 4 people that will determine whether or not a connection will last. Josh could decide that sparky and fashion-conscious (Lisa) just isn't his style, and from there choose either Dido (the sane one) or Erin (the quirky one). Or, he could go for Lisa's looks and energy, with the risk that if she doesn't find him captivating, a good first date will not lead to a second one. But let's just do this New York Post style: Lisa is hot and she's my pick.
(Note: there's no voting this week online. Ooooooooh, what does that mean?)

See all of you next week...

New York Post Dating: Valentine's Day Massacre!

2005-02-14T08:51:00.000-08:00

Editor's Note to the Readers:
If you were around for last week's entry, you may have noticed my excitement and anticipation for this week's pending entry - in a "sick bastard" kind of way. Well, my readers, this week's Dating feature has exceeded all of my evil expectations... and, as a result, this week's review will be extensive and highly entertaining! I'm giddy! I'm ecstatic! I'm somewhat horrified! Let's begin!

------------

Of course, let's link to the NYP Dating contents page one more time.

I'm struggling to find the right creative, snide, or tongue-in-cheek way to say this, so I'll just blurt it out for you: Brooke lost the poll (and lost big time), but was selected as the date. Also, prior to this, she was the winner of last week's pre V-Day fashion contest. You cannot see the pictures online, but the print version shows her dressed very hipster-ish among a crew of ladies who make various glaring fashion faux-pas. Basically, she was handed a half-page picture feature on page 44 (or somewhere in that vicinity) mere days after being featured in the Dating column. And then, inexplicably, Eric decided that Brooke - despite her demands, attitude, and intolerance - was the right girl for him.

My heart beats fast with blood blackened by my complete disgust for Brooke, and her obvious pal Mackenzie Dawson Parks, for both giving undue attention to this undesirable girl and for possibly rigging TWO contests along the way. (Ms. Parks has her byline on all of these stories, as opposed to Tom Sykes who only has a byline on the dating column) I am outraged, even in the context that this is only a dating column. They've deprived two other nice girls (both of whom collected substantially higher poll votes) of the opportunity to date a nice guy and form a meaningful bond. They've tried (and failed) to fool the great city of New York into thinking that Brooke is the kind of girl that men want. Like hell she is. Being young, trendy, and smug is no way to go about winning the hearts of honorable people.

And now I ask with a big perky smile, how'd the date go?!

One word: Shitty!

Get this: the Post sent them to the premiere of the movie "Hitch." I pondered this choice a bit, and ultimately decided that, although it's not as bad as a live performance featuring sexually explicit language and visuals for a blind date, it's still an improper venue for really getting to know someone. A film premiere is an obnoxious event for anyone who lacks that vapid, star-struck quality in their personality. Without fail, mere mortals end up getting crushed by a crowd of paparazzi and rabid fans. Aside from being annoying, it's very distracting for a blind date scenario. Plus, there's nowhere you'll find class-ism in greater effect than an ultra-VIP populated film premiere, and that's a poor environment in which to try to get to know someone... unless you're the type of douchebag that judges someone on the cars they drive or the velvet ropes they can cross.

The date was really fun for the both of them individually, but this is likely because of the open bar and the celebrities surrounding them. Strangely, Eric mentions very little about Brooke except that she's dominant and gorgeous. (He mentions her outfit, which is just one hot pink shirt shy of being the exact same thing she wore in the V-Day fashion contest! Not that I can blame her, though - if she won the contest with the outfit, why not use it where it counts?) Brooke duly notes her own dominant leanings and dismisses Eric for not keeping up with her - and finds a few extra reasons to flunk him as a romance partner. Dislike me all you want for saying this, but I told you so!

By the way, "assertive" is not a proper synonym for "bitchy." Brooke doesn't really seem "assertive" here. If you know what I mean.

For having a snotty profile, for being the biggest-margin loser to be selected by a date, for turning her date into a drooling mess without finding any chemistry whatsoever, for (allegedly) getting her pal Mackenzie to go as far as to rig contests to get her name and picture in the paper, for saying things like "I made sure we got a limo home, no matter what celebrities were waiting" (Cruella DeVille wouldn't stoop to such a statement), for being yet another hipster clown, and for ruining my Valentine's Day, I'm officially crowning Brooke the Queen Worst Dater Ever.

------------

Luckily, Brooke isn't featured in this week's potential daters, although at this point I wouldn't be surprised. I guess that would have been too obvious, right? Look for Brooke to be re-seeded as one of the female date choosers in the future. For now, we have...

"Kristin, a 23-year-old beauty". She's a junior publicist in fashion who does the girl-wearing-a-blazer thing. (Note that anyone who does this in the future will be mercilessly compared to Brooke. But I'll try to get over that for now.) She offers the following Paris Hilton-ism:

"I pretend to 'like' going to the gym, but really, I don't at all!"

Really? Last time I checked, that was a bad thing for a bar-hopping female. I hardly find it amusing when someone wastefully spends money on something for vanity's sake and then doesn't find the motivation to keep up with it and packs on a dumpy ass as a result. (and for the record, this unimpressed writer DOES work out often to keep in decent shape)

She also loves going to the movies or out to dinner, "searching for random celebrities at NYC hot spots," playing with dogs, going to restaurants, shoe shopping - "or any kind of shopping, really,"

... I've seen enough. I'm sure I need not elaborate on how I feel about this gem of a spoiled girl.

So who's offering to play "Daddy, Please!" this week?

Jason, a 29-year-old lawyer who's profile does not reflect the sort of strong educational background you'd expect a lawyer to have. He seems rather simple. And that's a bad photograph. In all fairness, if he is indeed a lawyer, he'd be a wonderful father and family man. He might be a bit corny, lumpy, and non-intellectual, but those are the qualities of a perfect dad. However, Kristin is not the kind of child he should be getting...

Michael is a 28-year-old sales executive who seems to be pointing toward a serious, settled-down relationship. I'd immediately rule him out if it wasn't for the fact that Kristin claims, in her words: "I'm a grandma at heart." He might be able to keep up with her lifestyle (it's a long shot); she might find him to be the sort of tall, dark, and handsome rock (ala Mr. Big) that she can anchor herself to. Plus, maybe she's not as vapid as I'm making her out to be. (Remember, I blame the Post for sucking all intelligence out of people's dating profiles and substituting it with cheese, martinis, and old material from Us Weekly)

Matt's a fairly interesting law student. And he's quite tall. I'll leave him alone, he's nice and he's innocent (as are Michael and Jason). I just don't see him winning over Kristin, though. That's an instinctive opinion more than anything else, but I'll stick to it.

Based on potential, I'll choose Michael. None of these guys seem to be a close match to Kristin, though. The polling is all screwed up, with Matt and Jason leading Mike. Kristin is in none of these guys' leagues, so I'm foreseeing another disappointment one way or another.

Well, that's all for our big Valentine's Day extravaganza! Although love is not in the air this week, it's not often that we are given such a villain to root against! And now I have material for the rest of the year: I can compare all of the worst girls to Brooke until someone actually tops her - and the idea that someone can unseat Brooke as the Queen Worst is quite scary indeed! I had a lot of fun, and I hope you did, too! My parting words to you: ignore what you see in the newspaper, and try to find some of that old fashioned love out there...

New York Post Dating: Liars & Racists + Smokers

2005-02-08T08:46:00.000-08:00

Link to the NYP Dating contents page...

From last week, our "vivacious 24-year-old fundraiser" Abby chose... errr, who? Jason, 28? Who is this guy? Or, more appropriately, why are the picture name captions switched? Isn't this the 35-year-old Neil from last week in the restaurant picture? A misprint, perhaps? I know it was, I have the original posted web page! I can prove that they screwed up the info that they posted about two of the three guys. In any case, it's as if she chose someone that wasn't even on the original list.

Which is not really a big deal anyway, since I saw a weak matchup from the start and it turns out the eventual date was cold like a skinny dip in Alaska. She didn't seem sparks but she wanted to leave the door open to things. Jason, however, all but filed a restraining order. Apparently, she's a smoker, and he hates smokers. So forget it!
==========================
This shellacking of the New York Post Dating column has been brought to you by "the fabulous Wildflower restaurant on Bleecker Street." Our unwitting food critic says, "Wildflower was an absolutely adorable place; it was very cozy, and the whole vibe of the place was great. It was decorated with bright yellow walls, which gave the whole space a very warm feeling. It felt very relaxed and very homey - a perfect spot for a first date. The food and wine were absolutely amazing! It was one of the best dinners I have had in a long time." And our readers agree: "The dinner we had was absolutely fantastic, and I would recommend it to anybody. It had a really nice vibe and very cool music!" Tonight's specials are a cold antipasti, a large-sized gazpacho with garlic bread, and a wonderful steak tartare with a side of blue balls.
==========================
Can a new couple end our long winter of discontent this week? No one's gotten laid here in a while, you know. (As you'll see, that's a common complaint)

You know a profile is going down the tubes when the first thing you see is a picture caption that says, "Culture vulture Eric also likes a good guffaw." Fuck you for making me read that. Let's let Eric do his own talking: "27-year-old film editor and proud Brooklynite," "obsessively consuming forms of media and pop culture," "likes watching TV shows like 'The Wire,' 'Arrested Development' and 'The Amazing Race' - Hey, don't knock it until you've tried it!" Relevant info: "I'm a big fan of the talking date as opposed to the activity date... I like the idea of changing the scenery a few times on the date... it makes it seem more like an adventure." Okay, we have something to work with here. Eric's reasonable looking for a male, without being too pretty (he looks older than 27 - and he's balding), so it might not be too hard to find someone suitable for him...

Amber is 29. That picture is criminal. We can all safely assume that she looks much cuter in real life - and once again, damn the Post for being unable to take good pictures of good-looking people. She looks like she's constipated. They asked what she drinks, and she named things that cost over $12 a glass... so she must make good money. She's looking for a smart guy, a conversationalist. So far, Eric is not a bad match, if perhaps likely being too poor to buy her the drinks she likes (unless she all of a sudden develops a taste for PBR in a can)
... and here's where her profile jumps the median into oncoming traffic.

"All I kept thinking was, I can't even get the guys I don't want!"
"I'm seriously thinking of writing a book called 'No Sex in the City: The Real Story of Dating in N.Y.C.'"

*sigh* It was nice knowing you, Amber. Get help.

Brooke is 24, has a cute receptionist vibe, is definitely cerebral, and might be a bit full of herself.

What's sexy? My ideal guy not only gets my sense of humor but can throw it back at me.

... plus more comments indicating that she needs no one to love, she already loves herself. She's not terribly arrogant to the point where I'd discount her, but I'm cautious nonetheless - Eric isn't an underwear model type of guy, so she might be unimpressed. Speaking of things she's unimpressed by:

If you're asking, I hate football. I don't really watch sports on TV (unless it's the Olympics). And no fratheads, please!

Yikes. Eric, the movie master, might be reminded here of a particularly good flick - "Saving Silverman." She'll ban him from his friends and make him get ass cheek implants! (hey, that would make for good reading in the Post...)

Ann is 24 and is an Advertising Assistant just like Brooke. After last week's word jumble, I have the feeling that we can count on the fact that one of these girls is not 24 and is not an Advertising Assistant. Who knows what they are? Here's what we do know about Ann: she practices yoga, she likes reading, she enjoys walking, she's aggressive about pursuing smart guys, she insists on good hygeine, she does text messaging (minor warning sign about impersonal communication habits, but we can let it go), and has a friend that thinks she should be washing dishes in the morning. (???) I think she's cute, and I think her personality is way better than Brooke's. Also, she's not severely jaded like Amber. She made it through the "worst date" question alive, too. And, I think her and Eric would make a cute couple.

I'm going with... (drumrollll) Ann! The voters, however, disagree - they choose Amber's adoration for articulation above Ann's all around appeal. (alliteration, always assinine) Amber's got quite the lead in the voting... and Brooke, as cute as she looks, is getting a drubbing here! Wow, you don't see that often. I'm telling you, this is a tough dating town...

Next week: our Valentine's Day special! Our exact same regular column, with extra misanthropic flavoring! (yes, it's because the author is single, and is also being forced to attend an engagement party. It's for his younger brother, which makes it all the more bitter and frustrating)

See you then!

New York Post Dating: Sex on the screen, just a kiss on the date

2005-02-01T09:41:00.000-08:00

Link to the NYP Dating contents page...

Ethan chose Adrienne, she also rocked the voting, and the Post commits three of their typical egregious sins against both journalism and the dating scene:

Those black & white "poll results" pics that make a horror out of Kim and Rachael - so not nice of them. By the way, my Peter Gallagher joke from last week just broke all defenders and sprinted for the endzone.
Once again, they're pimping a restaurant. Hard. "Le Zinc" sounds like a French dietary supplement - taken after a meal with your "Le Multi-Vitamin". (I just want to confess that I truly want to commit suicide after making that joke. Sorry.)
Once again, our blind date is sent to see something with unsettling sexual overtones - in this case, the "Kinsey" movie.

Whatever. It's hard to read the first paragraph when that picture is right there of the... umm, couple. In this case, body language tells quite a tale: Adrienne looks laid back and happy (and cute!), while Ethan is posing for his WWE intro photo. Hey, Ethan, do you have any teeth? Show 'em once in a while.

I'll sum it up for you quickly: they talked a lot, and they might hang out again. I'm left undecided about Ethan, because while his body language and words tell one tale, Adrianne's observations tell another. Listening to her, you see a likeable guy who should get a second date; listening to him, you just want to throw him off a moving train. Adrienne, however, is handling things perfectly, so if things don't work out here (and they may not, as sparks did not fly yet - even though I don't think that's necessarily a bad sign), she would make a perfect date for a cool, motivated guy.

Knowing that the Post has plans to use a pair of front-row tickets for "Kama Sutra: The Musical", who will be sitting in the hot blind date seats this week?

Abby is 24, and she's not giving off a hottie vibe. She just doesn't have the look. She fell hook, line, and sinker for the "worst date" question ("They just keep getting worse!"). She's a "preppy chick with a hippie heart", which I don't understand whatsoever. She names a few random activities that she enjoys, like "snowboarding", "reading", and "hanging out with friends". She's looking to avoid conceited men and bad kissers. (Hey, Abby, congrats on getting this particular week; you just dodged a bullet with Ethan from last week)

So who's the least conceited with the best lips? Let's see:

Neil, 35, the only banker who wears a crew neck. What a goofy smile on this one! But this isn't a modelling competition, so if Abby doesn't hear the "35 years old" part, she just might go for him. He enjoys good kissers too! Here's a choice quote:

What animal do you most resemble, and why? I'd have to say a cat, because that's the pet I have.

Bizarre! Look up "resemble" sometime in the dictionary! And another one:

What's not sexy? Racists and liars.

Wow, unintentional comedy galore! If I were watching this on TV, I'd have pissed my pants laughing. But he's a Yankees fan, so he's the man to beat!

Jason, 28, but looks 35. What does he do for a living? I forgot, I was distracted by the hideous turtleneck. His profile doesn't have any red flags, so we can count on him for a non-evil date. I call it a tie between him and Neil - that is, until we factor in...

Tom, 23, the forgotten member of the Strokes! Has no shame about ordering sugary alcoholic drinks! (upon a quick look, he may have no shame at all!) Looking for a girl with "a spicy personality" and "cute insecurities"... which begs for someone with Lower East Side mental damage and not Upper East Side prep (like Abby). Let's run through some more discordant interests: "skiing", "George Carlin", "drums", "great coffee", "Central Park." (This stuff just writes itself) And, best of all:

What's not sexy? Dead fish syndrome. I don't care if you're drop dead gorgeous - if you won't meet me halfway, you might as well walk halfway home.

What the hell does that mean? Flashes of Biff from "Back To The Future": "Why don't you make like a tree... and get the hell out of here!" That made no sense whatsoever. Hilarious!

After looking closely and carefully at these clowns, the only one who makes a sensible date for Abby is Jason. Sure, he's not quite that spicy, but he might be on Abby's level... the other two definitely aren't, although she might have one more "worst date" tale from one of those guys. The vox populi right now screams for Neil, but I'm hoping more people see the fact that, again, Neil is 11 years older than Abby - and vote accordingly.

So long, farewell, auf Wiedersehen, goodbye!!!

New York Post Dating: A Tall Order Comes Up Short

2005-01-25T11:49:00.000-08:00

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

2005-01-16T11:21:00.000-08:00

(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.