Singletude: A Positive Blog for Singles

Singletude is a positive, supportive singles blog about life choices for the new single majority. It's about dating and relationships, yes, but it's also about the other 90% of your life--family, friends, career, hobbies--and flying solo and sane in this crazy, coupled world. Singletude isn't about denying loneliness. It's about realizing that whether you're single by choice or by circumstance, this single life is your life to live.

Sunday, June 28, 2009

Singles in the News: 6/21/09-6/27/09

Huzzah! A new Singletude feature!

From now on, Sundays will be respectfully reserved for "Singles in the News," a weekly digest of the most interesting and relevant headlines pertaining to singles. Stay aware or be square! ('Cause everyone knows square people have sharp edges and are scary.)

Here you'll find stories that will inspire, encourage, reassure, and sometimes agitate you, maybe enough to write your own op-ed. Plus, every week Singletude will bestow the Singles With Singletude Award to the article that highlights the most motivational single(s) and the Singleschmucker Award to the most egregious example of singlism in print.

Let's kick off this week's round-up:


Singles With Singletude Award
"Do It Herself"
By Richard Beales
North Bay Nugget
Summary: So you thought you needed a man to change your oil and open that pickle jar. Think again. The enterprising Kelly Donovan takes the "man" out of "handy" and replaces him with step-by-step instructional courses for self-reliant single women. Donovan's classes and one-on-one tutoring sessions cover such subjects as plumbing, electrical, and landscaping basics. "Why pay someone else to do it when you are perfectly capable yourself?" is Donovan's motto. Her plucky attitude and contribution to the empowerment of single females earn this interview the very first Singles With Singletude Award!

"Gannett Foundation Donates $42,000 to Local Nonprofit Groups"
By Graelyn Brashear
Summary: Keansburg, NJ's ProjectPAUL, ostensibly named after that saintliest of singles, will use its Gannet Foundation grant to help homeless singles find temporary residences.

"Legal Debate Overshadows Homeless Moms"
By Jennifer Smith
Kelowna Capital News
Summary: New Opportunities for Women (NOW) Canada constructs affordable housing for disadvantaged single women. But the city of Kelowna is threatening to derail their latest housing project. Is this a case of in-your-face singlism? Read and draw your own conclusions!

"Single Women Facing Retirement Have to Make Plans in Good Time"
By Roger Crombie
The Royal Gazzette
Summary: American women need a median of $500,000 stockpiled for retirement, yet only one in 10 has saved more than $100,000, and a third haven't even saved $25,000. Find out how you can plan for retirement more effectively and stop letting those extra dollars slip through your fingers.

Singleschmucker Award
What Is It With Cats?
By Sarah Treleaven
National Post
Summary: What is it with you, Ms. Treleaven? In your effort to promote the forthcoming documentary Cat Ladies, you can't resist demonizing single witches and their familiars--err, single women and their felines--with catty comments about the "undercurrents of sweet sadness" that supposedly lurk between the ladies' lines because "they're aware that their human relationships are lacking." All the old stereotypes from female masochism to maternal impulses are proposed to explain the puzzling bond between women and cats. (Yep, you know I love cats because they remind me of hirsute babies with claws.) Worse, Treleaven enlists some blatantly singlist psychologists to stack their credentials against the film's self-sufficient women. Says Dr. Joel Gavriele-Gold, "Where there's not human contact that feels like you live in somebody's heart, at least this animal's safety, security and health depends on you, which can be a very rewarding and important feeling." Right. Because cat lovers have no other family or friends and must derive their self-worth from playing house with Fluffy. How patronizing. It's my pleasure to award this article the first ever Singleschmucker Award!


"Men and Cats"
By Nick Barnett
Summary: The single male's (admirably less singlist) response to the inscrutable bond between women and cats. Can't a guy get some feline love, too?


"AP Poll: Americans Consider Pets Family"
By Megan K. Scott
Associated Press
Summary: And it's not just about cats, either! Check out the lengths some soft-hearted singles will go to for their pets.

"Consumer Goods Makers Targeting Late 30s Single Men"
The Chosun Ilbo
Summary: Korean single men of a certain age with disposable income aren't afraid to get girly.

"Girl Talk: The Two Kinds of Single Woman"
By Lauren Fritsky
The Frisky
Summary: Just in time for Singletude's observations on singles by choice versus singles by circumstance, Fritsky writes about her own close encounters with singles who don't want to be. But the big surprise of this light-hearted first-person article is that the singles are far more singlist than the marrieds!

"More Single Men Applying for Welfare"
KCBS 106.9 FM
Summary: It's hard for single men in the second-most expensive city in the country to make a living during a recession. Especially when they're still paid less, on average, than married men but taxed at almost double the rate. Shocker.

"Why Single Women Need Life Insurance"
By Allison O'Connor
Summary: Even if you don't have dependents, a life insurance policy can be a lifesaver for those who might be left with your debts...or for you in retirement.


"International Widow Day"
By Anjana
World Pulse
Summary: International Single Women's Day (also known as International Widow Day) highlights discrimination against unmarried women in Nepal.

"Marriage Promotion Right Claim, Wrong Reasons"
By Bella DePaulo
Conducive: Conceive, Chronicle and Change
Summary: Noted singles advocate Dr. Bella DePaulo critiques the federally funded campaign to promote marriage in the U.S.

"More People Eligible for BadgerCare Health Care Plan"
Summary: Do you live in Wisconsin? Are you 19-64? Do you earn less than $21,660 annually? Are you single? If so, you're now eligible for BadgerCare health insurance for a fee of as little as $60.00 a year.

"Put Your Jealousy on the Back Burner and Have Faith in Trust"
By Nicola Barry
The Press and Journal
Summary: A married woman speaks out against the ostracization of singles.

"Support Group Being Formed"
Ballina Shire Advocate
Summary: The Lone Fathers Association of Australia reaches out to single dads.


"5 Kinda Lame Things Single Women Do That Are Actually Fun"
By Jessica Wakeman
The Frisky
Summary: I don't think any of these things are lame, nor are they limited to single women. (The author herself is coupled.) Though her article is slightly singlist, it unwittingly makes relationships look like something you need a vacation from.

"25 Must-haves for Any Single Woman's Medicine Cabinet"
By Allison O'Connor
Summary: The title says it all.

"One in Five Women Stays Childless Because of Modern Lifestyle"
By Tom Whitehead
Summary: Britain's Office for National Statistics reports that single women are five times less likely than married women to have children. Child-free women are also more likely to have been only children, rank higher in education and socioeconomic status, and outperform their partners in the career arena.


"Salvation Army Celebrates Six Lives Taking New Paths"
By Jamie Klein
my SA news
Summary: The Salvation Army's Stepping Forward and Shining Star programs help homeless single women.

"Single Women Most at Risk of Poverty"
The FULL Story
Summary: Australia's Anglicare Victoria finds that single women are the demographic most likely to need social services.

"Where Single Men Way Outnumber Single Women?"
By Ami Angelowicz
The Frisky
Summary: A map of U.S. cities by singles population reveals that single women outnumber men in the East, while single men reign supreme in the West.


"More Local Residents Seek Free Health Care"
By David Hertz
Summary: Single Minnesota residents lose out as the state cuts its General Assistance Medical Care program for disadvantaged single adults.

"Single by Choice"
By Dana Carroll
Summary: The author muses about the fallout, positive and negative, of prolonged singleness.

Do you have thoughts on any of the stories above? (When commenting, please reference the title of the article.)

Do you have a question for Clever Elsie about some aspect of the single life? Have a rant or rave about singlehood? Write in, and you just might see your question in a Singletude Q&A or your rant or rave in a Singletude Sound-off!

Wednesday, June 24, 2009

Poll Results: Are You Single by Choice or by Circumstance?

Thanks to all those who participated in the second Singletude poll! Response more than doubled since the last poll, and with 50 of you chiming in, we now have what would be considered in the research community a small but decent sample group. :) Of course, this was hardly a scientific study. Nevertheless, the results give us a peek into the minds of singles who would seek out a blog that's supportive of the single life and hints at how the attraction of the single state stacks up against the allure of relationships.

Poll: "Are you single by choice or by circumstance?"

I am single by choice. I would rather be single than in a relationship even if I could find a suitable partner.
16% (8)

I am single by circumstance. If I could find a suitable partner, I would rather be in a relationship than single.
50% (25)

I have no preference. I equally enjoy being single and being in a relationship.
20% (10)

I prefer not to define myself by any of the above.
14% (7)

At the end of the day, it seems that the overwhelming majority of singles (50%) would prefer to come home to significant others as long as those "others" are right for them. At least, that's what it looks like at first glance. However, if you combine the singles by choice with those who are equally happy single or coupled, you get a substantial minority (36%) who are just fine without a partner keeping the home lights burning, thank you very much. Not to be misleading, though, you could just as easily interpret this statistic from the opposing viewpoint and argue that 86% of singles surveyed enjoy relationships, while only 16% voice a strong preference for a spouse-free life. The remaining 14% fall into an undefinable category, and I'd be interested in hearing whether they just don't care for the terms "choice" and "circumstance" or have more complex definitions than this basic poll could capture.

Thanks again to everyone who voted, and I hope the results proved educational in a totally unscientific, non-academic way. ;)

Do you have a question for Clever Elsie about some aspect of the single life? Have a rant or rave about singlehood? Write in, and you just might see your question in a Singletude Q&A or your rant or rave in a Singletude Sound-off!

Sunday, June 21, 2009

A Tribute to Single Dads on Father's Day

In 2008, according to the U.S. Census Bureau, 16% of single parents with kids at home were single dads. That adds up to 1.8 million American men shepherding their kids through the morning routine, ferrying them around after school, and serving as cook, maid, and homework helper at night. Day in and day out. Rinse, squeeze, repeat. A full 25% of these men were never married at all, and a frightening 57% of them struggle to provide for themselves and their children on earnings of less than $50,000 a year.

Single moms factor prominently in our collective consciousness since women in the single-parent demographic hold a comfortable majority. Undoubtedly, our cherished stereotype of the nurturing maternal figure contributes to this, as well. Mothers who go it alone are the recipients of our goodwill, not to mention charitable donations and community-funded programs. Men, on the other hand, are often assumed to be more interested in baseball stats and quarterly reports than developmental milestones. Not only do single fathers have to make do with fewer resources, but they also have to contend with disbelief and derision at their desire to parent. So let's dispel some of the myths that hound America's real heroes!

Despite the bias against single dads, research shows that they too are effective caregivers and that they balance work and home responsibilities with about the same competence as single moms. Kids of single dads are no less well-adjusted than kids of single moms, and they tend to have better relationships with both parents. Some studies indicate that children, especially boys, fare even better when they live with single fathers, scoring higher on measures of self-esteem, maturity, independence, resilience, and risk tolerance than those with only mothers at home. In addition, since men earn more than women, they may be able to provide greater financial stability for little ones. And, believe it or not, that extra testosterone doesn't translate into more misplaced aggression toward vulnerable sons and daughters; single mothers are five times more likely than single fathers to fatally injure their children. It's not a big leap from those findings to the realization that adult offspring of single fathers are just as happy, well-educated, and prosperous as those who grew up with their mothers. In short, a loving parent is a loving parent, and while the differences between Mars and Venus may forever intrigue, mystify, and infuriate us, they don't have much bearing on our child-rearing skills.

This Father's Day, Singletude celebrates the unsung single dads out there. Thank you for the tireless and often thankless work you do to raise the next generation. Because of you, 3 million children will sleep tonight knowing that they are loved, supported, and safe. Because of you, those children will grow up understanding responsibility, hard work, and sacrifice. Because of you, they will become adults who can truly say that you were their heroes.

Resources for Single Fathers
Fathering Magazine
Single Dad
Single Dads Town
The Single Fathers' Lighthouse

Are you or were you raised by a single dad? If so, what were some of the challenges and rewards you experience(d) as a single father or the child of a single father? Do you think children can thrive with single fathers as well as they can with single mothers?

Fun Link of the Day

Do you have a question for Clever Elsie about some aspect of the single life? Have a rant or rave about singlehood? Write in, and you just might see your question in a Singletude Q&A or your rant or rave in a Singletude Sound-off!

Monday, June 15, 2009

Why I Am Single by Choice

I am single by choice. I'm still getting used to saying that after years of considering myself single by circumstance. In "Single by Choice or by Circumstance?" I promised that I would explain the change of heart, and I will. But first, I want to address your response to the last post, which spawned a revealing dialogue about how we define "single by choice," "single by circumstance," and the variant "single by chance" suggested by several readers.

When Singletude has used the term "single by choice," the intention has been to describe singles who prefer to be single rather than coupled. Conversely, the phrase "single by circumstance" has been used to denote singles who would prefer to be coupled given suitable partners. However, some of your comments rightly alerted me to shades of "choice" that aren't acknowledged by such black and white classifications. Some readers proudly claimed "single by chance" as a more accurate and empowering self-descriptor, associating it with a conscious refusal to settle or give in to matrimania while keeping an open mind toward future prospects. Others pointed out that some people don't think in terms of preference, just accepting and relishing whatever life brings, whether single, married, or something undefinable. Although Singletude will continue to reference "choice" and "circumstance" for the sake of simplicity, I greatly appreciate all the nuanced perspectives that everyone has contributed to our understanding of how singles perceive themselves.

Today I am unabashedly a single by choice in the sense that if the perfect boyfriend fell in my lap, I couldn't dump his bum on the floor fast enough. That is not to say that I will never be in a relationship again. I stand behind healthy relationships as sources of love, support, companionship, and inspiration in the lives of many and encourage anyone who wants a relationship to pursue it. However, I'm now realizing that just because a romantic relationship can be a positive force in one's life doesn't mean that everyone should have one. I'm one of those people who shouldn't, at least not right now and maybe not ever.


Was your first reaction to that last sentence a sympathetic "awwww"? Did you instinctively think, "Oh, she'll change her mind"?

If not, congratulations! Singlism can't fool you, and matrimania has no hold over you! If, however, you were just caught in the act, don't feel too bad because your reaction just proved my next point--that lots of people, even those who think it's possible to be single and happy, can't fathom that anyone would be happier single than paired. But right now, that is exactly the case for me.

Like many singles, I didn't imagine this life for myself when I was growing up. At around 14 years old, a friend and I swore that we wouldn't marry and have kids before age 25 so that we'd have time to get educated, build our careers, and see the world. From the time I was a teenager, it wasn't a question of if, but when. Then 25 rolled around...and disappeared in my rear-view mirror...and I was no closer to marriage than I'd been at 14. Somewhere along the way, I noticed that I didn't mind the interludes of singleness between relationships, but I still assumed I'd rather be married if the right man showed up.

As the years passed without a ring on my finger, it occurred to me that I couldn't keep waiting for someone else to give me a fulfilling life. I was going to have to find fulfillment for myself. While questioning how to do that, I began to deconstruct my concept of a good relationship and what it could provide me that was worth continued pursuit. However, it wasn't until I was mentally sweeping up the fragments of my most recent relationship that the answer winked back at me, bold and undeniable: not a whole heck of a lot.

For some time, the three major draws of relationships--romance, companionship, and physical affection--have been losing their charm for me. As far as romance is concerned, it's not that I don't still thrill to a poem written for me or a candlelit picnic awaiting me at the lake. But now my heart merely flutters instead of thumping right out of my chest like a car stereo at full volume. By now, I know that sweet nothings in my ear mean just that--nothing--and I've heard most of them before. To me, this isn't some tragic loss of innocence but a mature awareness that flowery words and extravagant gestures straight out of an 18th-century court don't necessarily foretell long-term compatibility or genuine commitment. It's also a kind of experiential satiation, a feeling that Ive been there and done that, enjoyed it, and no longer have a craving to be serenaded by moonlight or waltzed around under the stars. Sure, romance is exciting, but if it never swept me off my feet again, I wouldn't feel like I had missed out or been deprived of something.

Companionship, too, is somewhat overrated for me. A dyed-in-the-wool introvert, I used to yearn for that one person who would understand me better than I understood myself, my best friend and soul mate with whom I could withdraw into a little cocoon world. What I've learned in the intervening years is that no one can be the whole world to someone else. Even someone who has an uncanny connection with you will, at times, misconstrue, disagree, differentiate. Despite the poetic tradition of becoming one in matrimony, you will continue to be two separate people, and where there are separate thoughts, beliefs, and desires, there will also sooner or later be conflict. That's why it's imperative that we don't invest our entire emotional well-being in one person. We need to have other family members and friends to open our hearts to, have fun with, learn from, rely on. When lengthy spells of singleness drove me to seek out and strengthen that web of relationships, I found that they gave me the emotional and mental sustenance I longed for. At the same time, I got accustomed to making coffee runs, strolling in the park, and poking around museums on my own. To my surprise, I didn't have to have someone alongside me to delight in these activities. A book, earbuds, or my own thoughts were companionship enough.

And then there's physical affection, the cornerstone, we're led to believe, of relationships. Such a double-edged sword for me, a source of both pleasure and pain. One of the most common complaints I hear from singles is that they miss the high of sex, the closeness of sleeping in another's arms, the relief of a foot rub or neck massage after a long day, the simple comfort of a hug to remind them that they're loved, appreciated, wanted. But for all the joys of physical intimacy, there are also annoyances, frustrations, dissatisfactions. Meditating on the dark side of sex, I think of all the times I have felt pressured to offer the use of my body to someone, not because I wanted to but because I didn't want him to reject me or feel rejected. I think of all the covers pulled off in the night, the muscle cramps from sleeping in positions contorted around someone else, the snoring slicing through my peaceful dreams. I think of the hours I'm obliged to spend on shaving and personal care, the sexy lingerie I'm supposed to keep my drawers well-stocked with, the risks of pregnancy and disease and the side effects of birth control. I think of these things and remember that physical love exacts a price of its own.

Of course there are other perks that relationships offer. Convenience, support, security, social standing, the chance for children. Some people marry for these reasons alone. But I believe that a man should be more than just a woman's handyman, paycheck, or sperm donor. A woman should be more than just a man's housekeeper, arm candy, or incubator. I believe that two people should be together primarily because they love to be in each other's presence. Those other bonuses like the guaranteed Saturday night date, the shared rent, or the extra pair of hands in the kitchen are not good enough reasons by themselves to dedicate one's life to someone else. To be with someone for just those reasons is tantamount to using that person.

So I can't, in good conscience, enter a relationship for the wrong reasons, nor do I really want one for the right reasons. The benefits of relationships simply don't outweigh the drawbacks for me. They are just not enough. And drawbacks there are in spades.

I know somewhere out there someone is reading this and thinking, "She just hasn't found the right person yet." I used to believe that, too, so that's probably why I only reached this conclusion, finally, after my last relationship ended. It was then I discovered that no matter how deep the connection or intense the passion, no matter how stimulating the conversation or enriching the shared experience, no matter how compatible the interests or complementary the personalities, relationships are still work. They demand compromise and sacrifice and adjustment and accountability. And all that work just isn't worth it to me. The pain of argument is not overcome by the satisfaction of making up. The loss of self-direction is not justified by the gain in synergy. The reduction in personal time is not compensated for by the increase in companionship. The irritation of quirks and foibles is not offset by the ease and comfort of familiarity. Even when a man is everything I could want, the sweetness of a relationship is not enough to counter the sour.

Before you roll your eyes and go back to sucking face with that hottie you met at the bar, please remember that I'm just explaining my own rationale. I don't expect it to apply to everyone or even to most people. I'm well aware that I'm a rather unusual person in somewhat irregular circumstances, which affects my attitude toward relationships. For instance, if I wasn't self-employed and trying to expand my own business, my personal time might not be so important to me. If I didn't live a fairly bohemian lifestyle, self-determination might not be such a sticking point. In fact, maybe one day my life will be different enough that I'll change my mind. After all, if it's changed once, I'd be foolish to think it couldn't change again.

Nevertheless, this is the way I feel right now, in my present situation, about this particular lifestyle decision, and this is why. Although I respect and blog about other lifestyles, this is the perspective that I write from. I am single by choice. I'm neither proud nor ashamed of it, neither thankful nor resentful, neither champion nor protester. It's just the right choice for me.

If you haven't already answered this question, do you consider yourself single by choice, single by circumstance, or single for other reasons? If you are single by choice, why? If you are not single by choice, why? Do you think it's better to be one way or the other? Why or why not?

Fun Link of the Day

Do you have a question for Clever Elsie about some aspect of the single life? Have a rant or rave about singlehood? Write in, and you just might see your question in a Singletude Q&A or your rant or rave in a Singletude Sound-off!

Sunday, June 7, 2009

Single by Choice or by Circumstance?

Increasingly, the single population seems to be dividing into two camps--singles by choice and singles by circumstance. Maybe you've noticed it, too. Maybe you've eagerly aligned yourself with one side or the other, or maybe, like me, you've been hesitant to label yourself and even a little concerned about the repercussions of divisive language.

When I started Singletude, I intended to serve both audiences indiscriminately. The idea was not to push singlehood as preferable to marriage or coupledom but to celebrate its unique advantages, as you might celebrate any other stage of life--childhood, adolescence, parenthood, late life. Singletude was designed to meet singles where they were, regardless of how they got there, offering resources, support, and a positive attitude toward the unattached. I believe in making the most of the lives we're given and wanted to help people recognize that, whether or not they chose the single state, they could be happy living it. Furthermore, I hoped to expose discrimination against singles in its many insidious forms and mobilize others to speak out against it.

That said, I don't mind telling you that when I began blogging, I was single by circumstance. I didn't state this overtly because I didn't want to alienate those who were single by choice, although I'm sure some of my posts spoke for me. At the time, I'll admit I even thought that while it was the bees knees to be single, it was their whole honeypot to be married. I had bought into the shoddy popular science that claimed marriage was a panacea for depression, loneliness, ill health, poverty, and socks with open-toed sandals. Moreover, while I firmly believed it was better to be single than sorry, which is more than one can say for a lot of matrimaniacs, a relationship chock-full of chemistry, romance, and commitment was something I very much wanted. And, yes, dear readers, I hoped it would one day lead to marriage.

Go ahead. Lob your tomatoes at me. Just make sure they're fresh-picked organic, please.

I still don't think there's anything wrong with wanting to be married. In fact, I think monogamous commitment is the best context in which a relationship can grow. (Yeah, I'm familiar with the argument that we're biologically programmed to hook up with multiple partners, but we're biologically programmed to do lots of things we no longer do, such as spear those we don't get along with.) The desirability of marriage (to some people) does not make the single state undesirable, nor does it make unmarried people any less worthy of the perks and protections currently enjoyed by those who are legally wed. That's what this blog has always been about, not an attempt to glorify the solo lifestyle above all others or convince everyone who wants a mate to repress that longing.

In fact, I'm a little disturbed when I see what I'll call militant singles bashing those who are or hope to be partnered. True, there's a fine line between living with that hope and living for it, and I think that line trips up some well-meaning singles who worry that their peers will put their lives on hold until marriage. But they miss the fact that a single person can have a full, exciting life and yet also want to add a spouse to it, just as he or she might want to add a child or another friend. The difference, I suspect, is that the child and the friend don't provoke our resentment because people aren't rewarded in a way we perceive as unfair when they have children or make new friends. Nevertheless, our justified resentment of singlism should not justify berating singles who seek relationships, whether or not we're interested in the same thing.

I include myself in this reminder because in the past few months, I've crept over the line into the league of singles by choice. I can't tell you when exactly it happened. I didn't desert the ranks of singles by circumstance and make a mad dash for it. It was more the culmination of lessons learned in my third decade of life--not lessons that apply to everyone, but to me. Regretfully, more than once I've caught myself trying to generalize those lessons, to urge other singles off the path to joint filing and his-and-hers wash towels. But that's not right. In pressuring others to conform to my idea of happiness, I'm no different than the majority who insist that I can't be happy single. So, as I find myself changing my stance, I want to recommit myself to representing all singles at this blog, not just those who do or don't want to be.

Nevertheless, the cat is out of the bag now. I have become a single by choice. I hesitated to reveal this because I don't want to be divisive. I don't want singles by circumstance to feel that they aren't welcome here or promote a mindset that some singles are different and better than others. Neither do I want to sign up for a lifetime membership in the single-by-choice club so that I can never change my mind without feeling like I have betrayed someone. But chances are that although I will still cover all topics that I believe are relevant to singles, including dating, there may be times when my own beliefs will influence what I write, whether or not I'm aware of it.

By now you must be itching to find out why I've made a philosophical 180. If so, get some calamine; it must be poison ivy because nothing I have to say is that exciting. :) However, for the gossips, the rubberneckers, and the bored workers waiting for summer hours to kick in, Singletude will dedicate its next entry to the premature demise of my relationship-seeking days.

Have you observed a division in the singles community between those who are single by choice and those who are single by circumstance? If so, what do you think the cause might be, and how should it be addressed?

Fun Link of the Day

Do you have a question for Clever Elsie about some aspect of the single life? Have a rant or rave about singlehood? Write in, and you just might see your question in a Singletude Q&A or your rant or rave in a Singletude Sound-off!

Monday, June 1, 2009

Footloose Femails: A Yahoo! Group for Single Women

Singletude would like to announce the debut of the hottest, hippest email list ever to grace Yahoo! Groups. Okay, maybe I'm a little biased, but I'm allowed to be because this is a group for single women, so it automatically gets the Singletude seal of approval. (Sorry, guys, this one is just for us girls, but if I hear of a comparable group with more testosterone, you'll read it here first!)

Called Footloose Femails, the group was started in April by moderator Iolanda of Sydney, Australia, to give single women an online retreat for socialization, support, and general exploration of the joys and challenges of solo living. Right now, the group is still small, numbering 14, so new members are welcome. There have already been some intriguing discussions about everything from male-female friendships to self-commitment ceremonies, and the larger the group gets, the livelier the conversation will be.

For those who are unfamiliar with Yahoo! Groups, you will need a free Yahoo! account to join. As with all Yahoo! groups, you can choose to receive and respond to messages by email or log in to the Footloose Femails forum online. I hope to see you all there!

Also, apologies to anyone who couldn't access Singletude over the weekend. The robotic powers that be mistook my love of informative links for spam and put the blog on lockdown. Thankfully, we've straightened out that little misunderstanding, and hopefully it won't happen again. (This is where I'm supposed to haul some intimidating threats out of my arsenal, but everyone knows you do not threaten a multibillion Web 2.0 monopoly and live to blog about it.)

Fun Link of the Day

Do you have a question for Clever Elsie about some aspect of the single life? Have a rant or rave about singlehood? Write in, and you just might see your question in a Singletude Q&A or your rant or rave in a Singletude Sound-off!