"A Critical (But Highly Sympathetic) Reading of New Yorkers' Sexual Habits and Anxieties" by Wesley Yang: A Singletude Response

Have you read New York Magazine's "A Critical (But Highly Sympathetic) Reading of New Yorkers' Sexual Habits and Anxieties" by Wesley Yang? If browsing singles sites or dating blogs is part of your routine, chances are you haven't been able to avoid this article or someone's opinion of it. Like sex itself, it has spawned a wide range of heated responses, from prophecies of impending moral apocalypse to passionate defenses of Gen Y's highly evolved textual shorthand. Because although the title suggests a bland report peppered with decimals and percentages in tables that list "number of times per week" and "number of partners per year," it's actually all about the wireless hook-up network that connects young, urban singles. It's one writer's response to the online New York Magazine column called "The Sex Diaries," in which one lucky male or female gets to play Carrie Bradshaw for a week and record his or her dating woes and sexual exploits. Yang's central question: "Are the digital tools that make it easier to find sex compounding the confusion that accompanies it?"

Yang says yes, and he's not the first to reach that verdict. Since the cell phone became a must-have accessory and the code of texting a lingua franca--since the Internet Age multiplied our social options to the infinite power, really--academics, politicos, pop psychologists, and lifestyle journalists have obsessed over the paradox of perceived choice in sexual or romantic partners. The idea is that as our choices increase, we become paralyzed with indecision and end up making no choice at all. When too much choice intersects with the impersonal void of wireless communication, some experts argue, human beings become disposable objects that exist only for momentary gratification, their existence erased afterwards with the touch of an address book key.

This is the theme of Yang's analysis, too. He reviews the diarists' weekly entries since 2007 and describes a cutthroat world of sex games in which everyone is a player, like it or not, and you can trust no one because your partner is also your opponent. The object of the game is to have as many partner options as possible. To handicap yourself is to reveal emotion your partner/opponent does not feel, and to lose is to have no options at all. The jackpot is "true love," but in this virtual reality, the winner is too disconnected to know when it's real and so forfeits the prize.

The sticking point for most commentators is whether or not the tech revolution is to blame for this state of affairs, but I'll reserve judgment on that because it doesn't really matter. The BlackBerry didn't come with a set of instructions on "Using Speed Dial to Juggle Hook-ups," "Using the Calendar to Create a Safe Emotional Distance," or "Using Autocomplete to Send a Break-up Text." People, singles out there on the dating scene, decided to use those features to that end. The technology facilitated it, but the idea was all human. My interest is not in how young, single Americans got to this place but in how they are functioning in it and whether it needs to be made a different and better place.

What strikes me about the voices Yang quotes is that they're not the voices of empowered, sexually fulfilled, enlightened singles. They're permeated with angst, frustration, disappointment, and bitterness. It's possible that a selection bias is interfering here, but I believe that Yang is sincere in his attempt to represent the zeitgeist as he admits, "Reading the Sex Diaries all in one enormous gulp...caused me to surf on the edge of a terrible vertigo as I thought of the many wounds I had myself endured and inflicted during my brief career as a person with a New York City sex life." When he's moved to tears by an entry with a happy ending, I don't doubt that he's stumbled on a needle in a haystack, a Shangri-la unattainable to the multitudes of earnest diarists.

Is it any wonder that singles are unhappy trying to keep their personal lives impersonal? Yang describes how the "compulsive toggling of options winds up inflicting the very damage it was designed to protect against," noting how hard singles work to disguise "the fond hope, better kept to oneself, that one yearns to leave behind the serial f*** buddies, friends with benefits, and other back-burner relationships." This is not living with singletude, people. Singletude is about being authentic to your own wants and needs, not trying to repress what you feel to best someone else in a game of emotional one-upmanship. It's about promoting healthy attachments to others and concern for the community (as opposed to just one person), not using your singleness as an excuse to role over other people because you think you're a free agent and have no responsibility to anyone but yourself. Of course this lifestyle produces insecurity, loneliness, and disillusionment.

But, like ravers in some kind of dating trance, everyone keeps dancing. Why? Perhaps the answer lies in this nugget of wisdom, as Yang tries to explain why droves of single New Yorkers, some of the most entitled people in the world, would tolerate being manipulated like so many pawns in a casual after-dinner game: "The back burner is a confusing, destabilizing, and exhausting place to be, and yet none of the Diarists...appear to view it as anything but a fact of life. It is clearly less terrifying than the alternative, which is to not be on anyone’s." (italics added)

Ah-ha! There's the crux of it. Desperation. Millions of single daters have sold out on their ideals because they believe the alternative is to be alone, and that prospect is intolerable. They would rather have relationships that are unsatisfying at best and damaging, degrading, or depressing at worst than be single.

Let's clear up some cultural myths that seem to have resulted in a mass Millennial delusion: One, if you feel like your love life has forced you into a game of relationship poker that you never wanted to play, you should know that you can put the cards down. You can opt out. There will be people who will tell you to resign yourself to the way dating has changed, that this is the way of the world. That is, in effect, what even this New York Magazine article says, right? Well, believe me, you do not have to resign yourself to anything. All you have to do is be honest with yourself about what will bring you long-term happiness and what will derail you from that and then pursue the former single-mindedly. If someone is intimating that you have to let others treat you in a way that makes you feel hurt, anxious, ashamed, angry, depressed, devalued, deceived, manipulated, disrespected, or just plain uncomfortable in order to have a shot at a more meaningful relationship, that is a lie. Anyone who expects you to feel that way as a matter of course doesn't have your interests at heart and never will.

Two, you don't have to be a swinging, cybering, cell-wielding single to find a relationship. This is Peer Pressure 2.0: Adult Version, isn't it? It's the same lie--that if you don't conform, you'll be alone and unwanted. But the truth is that you don't have to cave to be with someone great. If you don't want to play the game, there are other singles out there who don't want to play it, either, and they will admire you all the more because you share their values. It may seem like "everybody's doing it, " but the more you refuse to, the more other singles you come in contact with will feel confident in their own decisions to opt out. That's how change happens.

Third--this is the most important part--even if you don't end up in a relationship, you don't have to be alone. The only reason this disposable dating movement has so much leverage is that it's powered by the sheer terror of being single (or maybe just sexless, in which case see "No Sex for Singles"). If you're so horrified by the prospect of singleness that you'd rather agonize over whether your booty call is ignoring you because you freaked him/her out with a kissy face text, then maybe you should ask yourself why. What's better about feeling like you have to map out elaborate schemes to get someone to see you and not just your cam phone shots? Today there's more literature than ever before to verify that singles can be as happy, healthy, socially active, and professionally productive as couples, if not more so. Anyone who doubts it should spend some time reading through the Singletude archives and visiting the blogs and web sites on Singletude's blogroll. Many of these sites also have information and tips that can help you learn how to resolve common problems and make the most of your life as a single. Above all, you should know that being single doesn't mean being alone! Research shows that singles, especially single women, aren't very likely to be lonely at all.

If New York Magazine's "Sex Diary" series is representative of how single adults in the U.S. date and mate, then it does seem like our shrinking, global society has paradoxically made us both more detached from any individual and more demanding of perfection from everyone. But even if technology has enabled this line of thinking, we can step back and consciously reevaluate how we choose to interact with others. Yang bemoans the transactional nature of wireless dating, naming "a certain callousness toward the merchandise" as "an unavoidable side effect of entering a marketplace as both buyer and seller." But each one of us has the choice to put ourselves up for sale or buy what is offered. Or we can decide that some things are priceless and treat them accordingly.


What are your thoughts on this article? If you're a fan of the New York Magazine "Sex Diaries" column, what are your observations about it? Do you think the tech revolution is responsible for the way sexual behavior has evolved over the past decade? If not, what is? What are some of the positive and negative consequences that have resulted from how dating and mating trends have changed? Can you relate to Yang's characterization of the current dating scene as a fast-paced, competitive world of superficial relationships, or has your experience with dating been different? Do you think the rise of the casual dating culture has generally made singles happier or unhappier? If the latter, why do you think so many singles continue to participate in it?

Internet Dating Is Not Like Ordering a Pizza by Cherie Burbach: A Singletude Review

In case you've been living it up on your summer vacation in Cabo while I've been slaving away over a hot CPU to serve up post after post of relevant, singles-friendly info and not feeling at all bitter about it, you may have missed that Singletude is currently running its first ever giveaway contest! The prize is a gift basket worth over $150 from SingleEdition.com. It also includes a book donated by online dating guru Cherie Burbach, Internet Dating Is Not Like Ordering a Pizza (IDINLOAP).

Burbach, a professional freelancer who is also the Dating feature writer at Suite101.com, knows that of which she writes. After joining an online dating service, she went on a dizzying 60 dates in six months, a figure that defies credulity, memory, and eight hours of sleep a night. She also met her husband.

If you've been reading online dating advice for any length of time, chances are many of the tips and tricks presented here won't be new to you. In fact, Singletude dispensed much of the same advice over a year ago in"Tips for Online Dating Success, Part I," "Part II," "Part III," and "Part IV." However, if the book's strategy isn't totally original, it is solid. The reason you'll find various Internet dating experts parroting this same advice is because it works. What sets Burbach apart from the others is that she conveniently collects all this wisdom in one volume and makes it easy to apply.

How easy? Well, instead of nebulous suggestions to "be unique" or "show off your personality," she offers step-by-step instructions with lots and lots of examples so you can see what that really looks like in a dating profile. Rather than leave you to figure out for yourself what it means to send a reply that's "open" but not "too familiar" or "pushy," she demonstrates several appropriate ways to initiate and respond to messages. In essence, reading IDINLOAP is like shadowing an Internet dating coach as she works the dot-com scene. Whether you've just jumped into the online dating pool or have been swimming in it for awhile without success, you'll benefit from observing how an expert navigates the waters.

Set in big, friendly type with generous spacing, IDINLOAP adopts a conversational tone from the outset, as though the author had stopped by for a casual, one-on-one chat (which is, by the way, the same tone she recommends for dating profiles). Burbach's formula for online dating success can be summed up as the right profile plus the right attitude, and she immediately sets out to show singles how to achieve both. She doesn't skimp; every stage of online dating is covered, from photo selection to first date follow-up.

Drawing on her experience as a professional writer, Burbach reveals the secrets to creating a magnetic profile, which aren't nearly as complicated as you might think. In fact, one of her simplest trade secrets is to write as though you're "describ[ing] yourself to...an alien," someone "who speaks your language but doesn't know anything about your world." Naturally, instead of just rattling off things you like to do and places you like to go, you would describe what those things and places are like, how they make you feel, and why they're important to you. The book's main tenet is that a successful profile isn't one that makes you sound better than you are but one that sounds exactly like you are so it will attract the kind of people who would be interested in you. Burbach's guided questions and examples teach you how to reveal yourself in your headline, profile essay, and multiple choice questions.

Another key part of her strategy is to help your potential date envision him- or herself with you, something you probably thought you had no control over. Don't worry. IDINLOAP will show you how to do that, too.

Soon, you may notice that Burbach's pointers for seemingly disparate pieces of your profile are transforming it into a thematic whole, a story of you that sparkles as more than the sum of its compelementary parts. This "big picture" approach is, to my knowledge, a completely fresh idea in the world of online dating advice and should add an impressive luster to any profile.

Thankfully, IDINLOAP doesn't push the online dating newbie out of the nest once the profile is complete. Burbach walks you through the search process, illustrates how to initiate and reply to messages appropriately, and will even hold your hand through the first date and its follow-up. Along the way, she provides a crash course in netiquette and steers readers away from the pitfalls that online daters unwittingly stumble into.

On that note, if IDINLOAP has a downfall, it's that its many "don'ts" may not be flexible enough for some readers. Burbach has very firm ideas about things like what you should and shouldn't show in pictures, the search criteria you should use, and how long your first date should be (exactly 60 minutes and not a second longer). Some online daters may find these rules too confining or not applicable. For instance, IDINLOAP is squarely aimed at singles looking for serious commitments, so those who want to date casually will have to adjust the guidelines to their own purposes.

Furthermore, the book's overriding philosophy is that online dating is a numbers game, so dating site members should make their searches as broad as possible and write to as many other members as they can. In Burbach's eyes, you can't figure out much about people until you meet them in person, so you should try to meet as many as will say yes to a coffee date. In contrast, the Singletude approach is to start searches narrow and work outward so you have the best chance of finding the ideal match for you. But, then, I'm writing from the perspective of someone who knows exactly what she wants, can detect it easily in profiles, and lives in a region with a lot of online daters. Also, I would find it overwhelming to juggle as many online contacts as Burbach recommends. In short, the Singletude strategy is based on what works for me; the IDINLOAP strategy is based on what works for Burbach. Either one may work for you.

If you aren't comfortable with the book's one-size-fits-all method, you can easily adapt it to your needs. However, most of the advice in this volume is not only sound but repeated again and again by Internet dating vets, so you will want to follow much of it to a tee. In addition, part of IDINLOAP's formula for success is a positive attitude that doesn't get much attention in most online dating how-tos. Everyone knows it's bad form to whine about your ex in your profile, but IDINLOAP's definition of a positive attitude is holistic, extending beyond smiling pictures and an upbeat headline to incorporate your expectations for the dating process on- and offline. Throughout the book, Burbach serves this slice of advice straight up to singles who are letting negativity interfere with their dating prospects and helps site members reframe the sometimes brutal online dating process as a light-hearted, experimental adventure.

If you're new to online dating, IDINLOAP is indispensable and could save you from costly errors and discouragement. On the other hand, if you've been around the cyberblock and are frustrated with Internet dating sites, this book may help you identify what you're doing wrong so you can finally meet your perfect match. Even successful online daters may find themselves refining old strategies with Burbach's advice. To win a free copy of Internet Dating Is Not Like Ordering a Pizza, enter the Singletude giveaway contest today!




Have you had success with online dating? If so, what are some online dating strategies that you would recommend? What are some online dating pitfalls that singles should beware of? If you've read Internet Dating Is Not Like Ordering a Pizza, do you have comments on the book?

Fun Link of the Day


Do you have a book or web site for or about singles that you would like Singletude to review? Contact Elsie!


Don't forget to enter the Singletude giveaway contest for your chance to win over $150 in prizes from SingleEdition.com!


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"!

Ms. Taken: The Fake Engagement Ring for Single Women

While combing stories for Singletude's last "Singles in the News" feature, I stumbled across an article called "Fake Engagement Rings Marketed to Single Women," which alerted me to a new bauble on the market that Reality Bling calls "a little bright lie." In case the headline I just linked to didn't tip you off, it's a fake engagement ring that's being marketed to single women. Cutely called Ms. Taken, the ring promises to help you pub 'n' club happily ever after unmolested by barflies. Just slip it on when you want to discourage a loser walking your way, then tuck it into its keychain fob when the coast is clear. It's the perfect on-again/off-again relationship.

Ms. Taken's home page is dominated by an embedded video commercial that should amuse those who like their fake wedding humor bawdy. You're also prominently invited to "Become a fan on Facebook" in case you care to advertise that your engagement is fake. That way if you really want to pull a fast one on a rejected suitor, you can flash him your faux diamond but whisper in his ear to look you up on Facebook, and then--gotcha! Suckerrrr! Neener, neener, neener! At the top of the page, a pic of the big sparkly is captioned, "On the dance floor or at the bar, nothing says 'I'm taken' like a fake engagement ring."

A click on "Product Details" reveals that Ms. Taken is a 2-carat Austrian crystal (congratulations--your pretend fiance is an investment banker!) set in a stainless steel band. It comes with the aforementioned keychain fob, a jewelry case, and, for some reason, 20 "Playaz" cards bearing images of classics like "Neal Anderthal" and "Jamaall That." If you order now, these timeless treasures will be yours to collect, trade, and preserve for generations to come. Or I guess you could pull them out if you and your friends get bored waiting for losers to leave you alone.

The ring and its accoutrement can be ordered for a grand total of $50.00. Frankly, you can buy a crystal or a cubic zirconia for half that in most department stores, though you'll have to drop it in your purse or your pocket instead of a custom-tailored keychain fob. And, of course, you'll have to do without the Playaz.

More interesting than the ring itself is the message it sends to singles. A quick scan of reviews of Ms. Taken shows that that message has been hotly debated. The article mentioned at the beginning of this post argues that Ms. Taken demeans single women, implying that they can't handle unwanted social interaction without relying on lame excuses or, worse, that they need the suggestion of a mate to prove they're worth more than lewd stares and cheesy pickup lines. Others, like "Ms. Taken = Puke in My Mouth," claim that Ms. Taken sends the wrong signal to men, communicating that it's a-okay to harass women who are unattached, that only a man's protection makes a woman worthy of respect.

Admittedly, I've donned a cubic zirconia with intent to deceive more than once, and I've never given a thought to it being singlist before. My motivation has usually been to avoid unwanted attention while out for a girl's night or when I want to run errands in peace, and now that I'm single by choice, an easy way to advertise my unavailability is even more attractive. It's not that I'm incapable of fending off punchless pickup lines with my rapier wit, but sometimes I'd rather not have to. Men in pursuit can be aggressive, especially in the metro area I call home, and some of them interpret a polite "no, thank you" as code for "you-have-three-minutes-to-convince-me-to-give-you-my-number-starting-now-GO." When I'm trying to have a good time with my friends or--God forbid--shop for groceries, drop a bill in the mail, or read in the park unmolested, the last thing I want to do is argue with Insert Random Guy about why I won't have a drink with him. A strategically placed rhinestone speaks for me (and hopefully says, "Game Over"). But, according to the bloggers above, the very fact that I expect a ring to exempt me from these exchanges proves to men that they can harass me with impunity if I'm not some other guy's property. Is this true?

I think not. I think it's unfair to men to assume they're all Neal Anderthals who view women as chattel, ripe for the plucking unless some other cowboy has left his stamp first. Today, an engagement ring is a visible sign of a woman's choice as much as a man's. In contemporary society's language, it says, "I have chosen to be in a monogamous relationship with someone. I am not interested in anyone else." Men who steer clear of an engaged woman are respecting her choice as much as the man she chose. If a single woman could wear a ring that was universally recognized to mean she wasn't open to dating, I suspect a lot of men would respect that, too. Of course, there would always be some who would see it as a challenge, but these would probably be the same cavemen who hit on women wearing engagement rings the size of the Hope Diamond. These male chauvinist oinkers don't respect anyone or anthing except the notches on their own belts and are just out to add a few more whenever they can.

Single men are susceptible to enculturation just like everybody else, and I won't claim that singlism never colors their interactions with single women. Undoubtedly, there's a man out there who won't take no for an answer because he believes that any woman should prefer his 5 AM Concerto in Snore Major to a lifetime of waking up to nothing but birds. But my guess is that most men have no such illusions when they present themselves to be chewed up and spit out on the nearest bar. Instead, they're just doing what successful hunters have always done--aiming for the most likely targets (women who are single) and shooting as many arrows as they can, hoping one will hit. If some of those arrows fall flat, miss the mark, or veer toward our chests instead of our brains or our funny bones, then the hunters have poor technique, not a special contempt for deer.

I'm not saying this to excuse inexcusable conduct. Like most people, I believe that women who are subjected to unwanted comments or contact should take steps to let offenders know their behavior is unacceptable, whether that means walking away gracefully or reporting them to management. But I don't think the majority of men set out to use Borat as a role model, and those who do don't care whether their sexytime partner is wearing a ring or not unless it's in her tongue. For the rest, a ring is simply shorthand for "no chance in hell." You could use a scowl, a slap, or puke in your mouth to get across the same message, but with a ring you can still be pretty. ;)

But maybe I'm wrong. Maybe those bloggers weren't overanalyzing, and I'm unwittingly supporting singlism every time I resort to a fast, one-size-fits-all excuse rather than a nuanced rationale of why I prefer to be single while I scan the room for an exit.


What do you think? Do fake engagement rings promote singlism? Do they send a message to single women that they are "less than" or that they can't fend for themselves in social situations? Do they send a message to single men that women who aren't taken are free to be harassed? If you're a single woman, have you ever worn a make-believe engagement ring, and, if not, would you? Why or why not? If you're a single man, what do you think of women who, um, engage in this practice?


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!

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!

When Relationship Compromise Is Self-compromise

Relationships demand compromise. We hear it again and again from well-meaning friends, relatives, and mental health counselors. At the same time, a long list of teachers, mentors, and great philosophers remind us to be true to ourselves, to follow our hearts. When I was growing up, one of my favorite quotes was:

If a man does not keep pace with his companions, perhaps it is because he hears a different drummer. Let him step to the music which he hears, however measured or far away. --Henry David Thoreau

If there's a message of compromise in there somewhere, it's using a pretty good cloaking device!

If you do have hopes of one day sharing your life with a significant other, a certain amount of compromise will be inevitable to keep the peace. But when does it become self-compromise to the point that you are now marching to someone else's drummer?

I pondered over whether or not to publish this post for a good week since the question arises from a matter in my personal life, and I've made it a point that Singletude is not a personal blog. And yet, I think this question is so universally applicable that it would be a lost opportunity not to address it here. So bear with me while I invite you to step into my world for a moment.

Recently, I ended a relationship with a man I'll call Andrew. (Yes, a relationship. Didn't think I had those, huh? ;)) He was a beautiful person in many ways, so it pained me deeply when things didn't work out between us. But the problem was that he and I had numerous lifestyle and belief differences which would have demanded a great deal of compromise had we decided to build our lives together. As I began to realize how vast our differences were, I found myself sinking into depression due to both the impending loss of someone I cared for so much and the self-doubt and -criticism stirred by our disagreements.

Since there were lots of things that Andrew and I loved about each other, he hoped we could compromise, reminding me that that's what people do in relationships. But it hurt to know that there were so many aspects of myself that he wanted me to change. (To be fair, it probably hurt him that some of his life choices, values, and habits were hard for me to accept, as well.) I started questioning everything from my career path to my philosophy of child rearing to my artistic sensibilities, wondering if he was right that these were areas in which I needed to compromise in the interest of reaching a middle ground with someone who had different ideas. Andrew assured me that a willingness to compromise was a mark of maturity and dedication to a relationship, and I knew that, to an extent, he was right.

To an extent. Those were the operative words. My relationship with Andrew highlighted a question I'd been puzzling over for awhile on my own: When is compromise an appropriate sacrifice for the betterment of a relationship, and when is it too costly a self-sacrifice?

As time passed and I tried on some of those compromises for size, I felt worse and worse about what I was compromising. Although I thought the world of Andrew, I was less and less excited about us as the sacrifices I would have to make mounted and I felt increasingly less accepted for who I was. It occurred to me that my singletude was slipping away, and I began to feel like a hypocrite. (For those not in the know, singletude isn't the attitude that it's necessarily better to be single than coupled but that it's definitely better to be single than in a relationship in which you can't be a happy, healthy individual.)

To compound my confusion, I wondered if I was just unhappy because I had unrealistic ideas about relationships. Perhaps all long-term relationships would require this kind of compromise, in which case the problem was me and my own self-centeredness. After all, the compromises Andrew was asking of me didn't seem unreasonable in his eyes, just as the compromises I was asking of him didn't seem unreasonable in mine. Yet, in the end, neither of us was willing to change.

Some observers may see one or both of us as selfish, stubborn, or intolerant. Others may wave the banner of independence and laud us for following our own paths and refusing to change for anyone else. I suspect that for most relationships to succeed, a certain amount of compromise is a necessary ingredient. But there's a fine, almost invisible line between what you should and shouldn't compromise, and equally blurry is the degree to which you should compromise on it.

Let me clearly state that I don't think love should be measured by that line. I know there are people who believe that love should conquer all and that if you don't practically rip your heart out in sacrifice, you must not have valued the relationship enough. I say that if you rip your heart out in sacrifice, you have nothing left to love with. Selflessness is admirable but not when you give up so much of yourself that you become an empty shell. I don't believe that kind of self-compromise is indicative of love any more than any other act of self-hatred. So I think it's unfair and inaccurate to surmise that Andrew and I (or any other couple in a similar situation) could've made it work if only we'd loved each other more.

For most people, though, I think it can be difficult, as it was for me, to discern when you're exercising your heart, making it work a little harder for someone else, from when you're on the verge of sacrificing it. By no means have I come up with a foolproof method of distinguishing between the two conditions, but I think my recent experience did teach me a few rules of thumb about when to compromise and when to stand your ground. Here are some questions you should ask yourself before you compromise for your partner (and please be aware that these can apply to any relationship, not just a romantic one):



1. Will this compromise affect my day-to-day happiness?

Many compromises involve relatively minor changes to your daily routine that have little impact on your overall life satisfaction. For instance, let's say your alarm is set to a death metal station, but your mate doesn't like to be blasted out of a sound sleep every morning. He or she prefers to wake up to the gentle strains of Beethoven, which, while not your ideal, don't make you wish someone would knock you back out when you wake. Setting the alarm to a classical station is, therefore, a reasonable compromise. Yeah, you'll miss your Slayer, but it won't, er, kill you.

Other compromises concern situations or events that occur so rarely that they have little significance for your general happiness. For example, your families may live far apart, forcing you to compromise on where you spend the holidays. However, this is a conflict you only face once a year, so it doesn't even register as a blip on your radar of relationship satisfaction the rest of the time.

On the other hand, some compromises threaten to dig deep, permanent trenches in your happiness. Let's say a woman deeply desires a large family and marries a man who doesn't really want kids. They compromise and have one baby. The painful result is that every day the woman longs to have more children while the man resents the work he has to invest in just one. Maybe another couple can't agree on where to live. The man grew up on a ranch in Wyoming, loves it there, and can't imagine living anywhere else. The woman craves a fast-paced city lifestyle and favors Boston, New York, or Washington, DC. They compromise by settling in a small city in the Midwest, but the man always misses the big open skies of Wyoming, and the woman chafes for a bigger, busier metropolis. These are examples of compromises that impinge on day-to-day happiness. And the unhappier you are, the more stressful it will be to your relationship.


2. Will this compromise change who I am?

Some well-intentioned people may advise you not to compromise on certain values that they consider integral to who you are, such as religious practices or the pursuit of various career goals or hobbies. But really only you can determine how important something is to your sense of self. Someone might be fine with promising to raise his children Catholic so that he can marry a Catholic wife, whereas someone else might be so committed to her Muslim faith that she would have to turn off her conscience to raise her children in another religion. A young dental hygienist may not feel defined by her job and have no trouble giving it up if her significant other got a promotion that would take them overseas, whereas a college professor's position may be central to his identity so that he would be devastated if he had to leave his department due to his partner's relocation.

In short, you should steer clear of any compromise that would alter a core part of yourself that you highly value. I emphasize those last words because change is good when you're ready and willing for it. But if changing yourself is tantamount to revoking the beliefs, values, interests, or objectives that are most important to you, then you will end up unhappy, which will take an equally unhappy toll on your relationship, as discussed in 1. Besides, what does it say about your partner's love for you if he or she wants you to change the very things that make you who you are? Answer: Nothing good.


3. Is my partner compromising too?

This is a biggey, and the answer has to be yes. The definition of compromise is "a settlement of differences by mutual concessions; an agreement reached by adjustment of conflicting or opposing claims, principles, etc., by reciprocal modification of demands." (italics added) A one-sided compromise is like one hand clapping. Compromise only deserves that label when both partners are meeting each other halfway.

How you accomplish that is up to you. You might agree to give up something this time if your partner will give up something next time, take on a new responsibility if your partner will help with it, or do something you both like instead of something just one of you loves. All of these are different examples of compromise, but what they have in common is that both partners are sacrificing.

If you're the only one sacrificing, or if you're sacrificing more than your partner, you'll be headed straight back down that road to Unhappyville. Granted, the equity of compromise is subjective, but what matters is that you and your loved one believe your compromise is equitable. For instance, if you're both okay with dividing labor along traditional male-female lines, fine. But if one of you thinks he or she is getting shafted in that role, then you have a problem.


4. Am I really willing to make this compromise?

The worst thing you can do when negotiating a compromise is to vow that changes are forthcoming only to relapse into old habits when asked to make good on your promise. For compromise to work, you need to commit to it. It may seem like the perfect solution to offer to cook dinner while your honey vaccuums the floor, but when you repeatedly "forget" to go to the grocery store or schedule too many business dinners, all bets are off, and your partner will be even more disgruntled than before because you reneged on your word. Before you agree to a compromise, be honest with yourself and your partner about what compromises you're really willing to make. To continue with the example above, if you recoil at the sight of raw chicken fillets and have convinced yourself by now that you like burnt toast, a compromise that has you wearing a chef's hat is unrealistic.

Instead, look for compromises that you know you can carry out with a little effort. So maybe you can't deliver in the kitchen. Okay. Then you might do the laundry or take care of the lawn or put the kids to bed every night. Whatever the compromise, you have to sincerely be willing to tackle and follow through with it.

This also means believing in the compromise. On some level, you have to agree that it's necessary and the right thing to do so that even if it wasn't your first choice, you know that it is, nevertheless, a good choice. By the same token, once you've settled on the compromise, you shouldn't feel resentful or regretful about it. If you do, that's a sign that you may want to return to the preceding guidelines to see how your compromise stacks up.

Ultimately, if you can't embrace the compromise and stick to it, it will be a sticking point for your relationship. There's no justification for spinning your wheels into the ground if you know that you can't get behind a compromise with enough faith and determination to push your relationship out of a rut.



Now, there is one question that you might think I've left out. On the contrary, it's the question that I hope you won't ask when judging whether you should compromise in a relationship: Do I love him/her enough to compromise?

People ask this question all the time, and I believe it contributes to many devastating choices. Why? Because, as I said earlier, compromise is not a measure of love and should not be used that way. If the compromise you're contemplating will have such a detrimental effect on you that you need to reevaluate your whole relationship, then it's a compromise that violates at least one of the principles above. And if you compromise under those conditions, you compromise yourself. Any decision made out of self-compromise is not a decision made out of love. It may be made out of fear (of losing someone), guilt (of seeming selfish), ignorance (of alternatives), or self-righteousness (another discussion in itself). But not love. Love is absent from any compromise that engenders chronic unhappiness, is inconsistent with one's identity, unfairly burdens one partner, or is insincerely made.

Please note that I'm not saying someone who makes such a compromise doesn't love his or her partner. But I'm also not saying that he or she does. What I'm saying is that love has nothing to do with it. The reason I'm so exacting about this is because too many people make untenable compromises because they've bought the lie that compromise is a measure of love, and the more you love, the more you compromise. Believe me, you can love someone more than a fish loves the water and still not want to compromise yourself for him or her, and, conversely, people who do self-compromise don't do it out of love. Yeah, I know that will leave a bad taste in the mouth of anyone who has a martyr complex, so if it's any comfort to you, I was one of your number for years and am not pointing any fingers.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not arguing that love doesn't entail giving generously to your partner. But you shouldn't give yourself away in the process. When the potential for self-compromise threatens to become reality, sometimes the most loving thing you can do is walk away rather than ask someone else to change for you.


Where do you draw the line between healthy compromise and unhealthy self-sacrifice in a relationship? Have you ever been in a relationship in which you compromised too much? How did you recognize that you had compromised too much? Did you choose to be single, or did you stay in the relationship? What advice would you give to someone trying to decide between singlehood and self-compromise for the sake of a relationship?


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!

He's Just Not That Into You: A Singletude Review

I'm putting today's planned post about single homeowning on hold because the cinematic version of Greg Behrendt and Liz Tuccillo's bestseller, He's Just Not That Into You, debuted this past weekend. Since the book's title became a rallying cry for countless singles, I know some of you will be lining up to pay homage to its truisms about boys behaving badly and the women who love them. So before you open your wallet and part with the equivalent of three Starbucks runs for the privilege of crushing someone else's cold popcorn kernels into the seat of your pants as the teenage boy behind you generously massages your back with swift, sure, repetitive kicks, I thought I'd put myself in the hot seat and possibly spare you the trouble.

As you may have inferred from previous statements such as "I hate Greg Behrendt," I really don't like Greg Behrendt. I didn't like the simplistic, one-size-fits-all philosophy he espoused in his book, so I didn't think I'd like the movie either. Well, the movie may not have been this year's Love, Actually, but as your standard rainy day romantic comedy, it wasn't half bad, and, to my surprise, I didn't have to give it an automatic thumbs down for towing the Behrendt line. If anything, the movie disputes his theory or at least leaves room for the messier elements of life that complicate relationships.

He's Just Not That Into You employs a star-studded ensemble as a selling point, and the acting is expectedly solid, but the Dickensian web of relationships is more convoluted than clever. I found myself wishing that the writers had condensed the book's talking points into just two or three arcs instead of creating a new character to illustrate each one. As a result, the characters fail to take on lives of their own and have about as much color and dimension as black-and-white sketches accompanying Behrendt's anecdotes. There's Gigi (Ginnifer Goodwin), the neurotic, pink phone clutching embarrassment to single women everywhere who manages to make every mistake in the dating book but can't imagine why guys don't call her back; Connor (Kevin Connolly), the object of her obsession, who just isn't that into her; Greg Behr--err, Alex (Justin Long), who just isn't that into anyone and makes it his mission to educate Gigi in the secret code of men; sexpot Anna (Scarlett Johansson), who throws herself at a married man, as all voluptuous blondes do; the philandering married man (Bradley Cooper), who of course won't leave his predictably uptight wife (Jennifer Connelly); and several other characters cobbled together from folk wisdom about the evils of cohabitation and the Internet.

The exception in this tribute to rules is Beth, a breath of circulating, if not fresh, air played with real poignancy by Jennifer Aniston, who must know a thing or two about the role of the long-suffering girlfriend coming to terms with her boyfriend's (Ben Affleck) contempt for the institution of marriage. Hers is the only story that pushes the boundaries of the cliche, though it ultimately does a 180 and ends up reinforcing them.

Interspersed with the vignettes are mockumentary-style interviews with sad examples of the female sex, who bolster the book's unstated but unavoidable blame-the-victim thesis. There are some genuinely funny lines here as well as throughout the rest of the movie, which is entertaining enough to rent the DVD and throw a pajama party. But there are also agonizing moments of heartbreak and humiliation that will hit close to home for singles who have been "on the market" for awhile without offering any insight or solution worth a $10 ticket.

And aren't insight and solutions what fans are expecting of the movie based on their favorite self-help book? For them, He's Just Not That Into You will surely disappoint and confuse for the same reasons that it surprised and pleased me: it doesn't actually support the book's prescription for dating success.

See, Behrendt would like single women to believe that men are all-or-nothing roboclones programmed to respond to the opposite sex in one of two ways--either flick them off like dung flies or fly them to the moon on a diamond-encrusted jet. No in between. And, according to Behrendt, this should be the case whether a couple has just met or been together for 30 years. Any man who hesitates to ask a woman out, call her back, commit to a relationship, or marry her just isn't into her and never will be. His philosophy of love leaves no room for baggage, shyness, insecurity, immaturity, or differences in romantic style, much less for the feelings that can blossom out of friendship over time. Plus, by absolving both parties of any blame, he does a disservice to both men and women. The message is that, whether you're a man who rejects women repeatedly and ruthlessly or a woman who's been repeatedly and ruthlessly rejected, you couldn't possibly have any problems except that you haven't found the right one.

Without throwing out any spoilers, let's just say that the movie contradicts this premise, and that, in my opinion, is its saving grace. It shows us relationships, in all their glorious sloppiness, breaking the rules. Friendships grow slowly into something deeper, men rethink their feelings and learn to commit over time, women make the first move and sometimes do get the guy. Interwoven with these anti-lessons are examples that support the book, too, but they succeed because they apply to superficial relationships, and that's where Behrendt's rules are of value. Your mother could've told you--and probably did--that most married men won't leave their wives for a fling. And, given the multiple avenues of communication available in our global society, if a guy doesn't contact you after the first date, he doesn't want a second helping of your wit and charm. Behrendt's problem is that he tries to force those broad-based guidelines to work in specific situations in which complex interactions of personal history, psychological needs, personality dynamics, and value systems determine the course of a relationship. The movie trumps the book because it acknowledges that a catchphrase like "he's just not that into you" isn't sufficient to explain those interactions.

But what I like best about this movie isn't just that it contradicts its source material; it affirms the single life in a way the book never did. In the end, no less than three characters choose to be alone for awhile, and that choice is presented not with pity but with acceptance and encouragement. As the camera pans through a final montage, the concluding voiceover reminds us that sometimes the happy ending is you on your own, making a new life for yourself. I'm into that!

He's Just Not That Into You won't win any awards, but it's cute, true to life, and surprisingly singles-friendly. If you're in the mood to waste some money this weekend, watch with my blessing.


Fun Link of the Day


(Read it and cringe.)



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!

Tips for Online Dating Success, Part IV

Today, Singletude concludes the "Tips for Online Dating Success" series. Now that you're armed with all the tricks in the book, get thee to eHarmony and put them to the test. ;)



10. WHEN THE BALL'S IN YOUR COURT, PLAY PING-PONG.

Okay! You've sent a message, and a prospective date has responded to you! You've reached level one! Give yourself a pat on the back for getting this far and take a minute to rest on your laurels. :)

Now I want to return to what I said in 8. about forcing respondents to pursue you. While Singletude doesn't advocate game playing in the sense of manipulating others toward ends that are beneficial to you and harmful to them, it's helpful in online dating to have an understanding of human nature. And one of the well-researched facts of human nature is that we value things we have to work for.

This is why I suggested in 8. that you hold off on barraging your potential date with compliments, contact info, and requests to meet up. Not only will that put an unbearable amount of pressure on him or her, but it also establishes a pattern in which you're doing all the work. And if you're doing all the work, what incentive does he or she have to meet you halfway?

That is not to say that you should kick back and twiddle your thumbs while your soon-to-be significant other tries desperately to flag your attention. Singletude doesn't support The Rules or similar systems designed to drive your date crazy with angst, jealousy, self-doubt, and confusion. However, if you think of your budding relationship as a game of ping-pong, you'll soon realize that you can't play it if one person isn't returning the ball. When you "ping," your romantic interest has to "pong" and vice versa.

To that end, you've set the pace with the first message, and your prospective date should respond in kind. From this point on, you will probably engage in a series of emails leading up to a phone call or two, and if the phone contact is smooth, you'll most likely arrange a date. (Of course some encounters will depart from this pattern, but at least in my experience and that of others I know, this seems to be the general structure of online dating relationships.) The emails you exchange should parallel each other in response time, rate of self-disclosure, overall enthusiasm, and progression toward the next level.

If you write to a member every day, but he or she only writes back once a week, that's not a good sign. Similarly, if after several weeks of communicating your potential date knows all about your family, friends, job, star sign, and favorite color, and you know...his or her first name, something's amiss. Did you give out your number but wait in vain for your phone to ring? Have you scheduled dates that the member keeps canceling? These are all situations in which you're pinging but not receiving a pong.

If you're not getting consistent pongs, examine your emails for the following problems:


A. Are they too long? When people want to read novels, they go to a bookstore, not an inbox. Run-on emails can make the reader feel overwhelmed or intimidated. The exception to this rule, of course, would be if both parties like to write and send lengthy emails every time.

B. Are they too short? Emails of just a sentence or two may communicate a lack of interest, especially if the other person tends to write fuller replies.

C. Are you responding promptly? If you wait too long to respond, your potential date may lose interest. A good rule of thumb is to reply within two days of receipt of the last message, more often if he or she replies more quickly.

D. Are you balancing your messages between information about yourself and questions addressed to the other member and/or responses to what he or she has written? If you don't seem interested in what the other person has to say, you risk coming across as a self-centered bore.

E. Are you revealing so much of yourself that there's no mystery left? Don't be "easy." Try to save something for the phone call and first date! ;)


Regardless of how closely you adhere to the above guidelines, some members will cut you off during the email stage. This can happen because a member has met someone else with whom he or she has a better connection, detected some incompatibilities after reading your last message, or had a bad experience that suddenly turned him or her off to online dating. Sometimes it may happen when the member is a flake, commitmentphobe, or cheater playing around. For whatever reason it happens, it signals that this person is not a good catch. You may want resolution, and of course you can ask for an explanation, but if you don't get one, don't waste your time. Look elsewhere.

On the other hand, perhaps your pings are getting ponged, and your game is seeming more and more like a love match. Great! Now comes the real hurdle, taking the ping-pong table out of cyberspace and plunking it down in the midst of the real world without losing your stride. How and when do you move your interaction to level two?

There are as many different preferences concerning the pace of online dating as there are singles. Generally, women are more cautious than men, so if you're a guy, don't be fazed if she's not ready for dinner and a movie as soon as you get her personal email. On average, users exchange two to three emails over three to four days, but it's not uncommon for communications by email, IM, or phone to continue much longer before a first meeting. While there is some evidence that these virtual interactions can strengthen the foundation of a relationship, few would deny that chemistry is best judged in person. Accordingly, if you postpone your first date for months on end, you're liable to form expectations based in fantasyland that are particularly suscpetible to disappointment when you finally do meet.

A lot of singles recommend setting a date to meet after a few weeks or a month if possible, and that is Singletude's recommendation as well. If the frequency of communication is quite intense, with emails flying back and forth every day and nightly phone conversations, it may be appropriate to meet even sooner. The point is to make sure that the missing puzzle piece, physical attraction, is present before emotional bonds become so deep that an in-person mismatch is devastating.

Online daters typically spend some time agonizing over where to meet, what to do, and how long to do it for. Obviously, safety is paramount, especially for women. For your first date, you should arrange to meet in a public place and have your own transportation so you don't need to get in a car with your date. It's not a bad idea to leave your date's name and contact info with a friend or family member and promise to call him or her when you get home. Resist the urge to go back to your date's place, no matter how the sparks fly and sizzle. After all, moving slowly never hurt anyone, and it just might save your life. (For more online dating safety tips, see OnlineDatingSafetyTips.com, Safer Online Dating Alliance (SODA), and Online Dating Magazine.)

Even if your date isn't Ted Bundy, keeping your time together short and sweet will build anticipation for date two...or give you a convenient escape route if you're already regretting date one. A lunch break or cocktail hour, after which you have other places to go and people to see, can be the perfect setting. Some singles even go so far as to specify a time limit for the rendezvous, although it may take some finesse to walk out when your date's 30 minutes are up and he or she is only halfway through the story of Uncle Billy Bob's first time on Jerry Springer.

You can maximize your opportunity for interaction by picking a quiet location and an activity conducive to conversation (think coffee at Starbucks, a picnic in the park, or, yes, a walk on the beach). Resist the impulse to avoid the getting-to-know-you dance through a movie, at which words are forbidden, a concert, at which you can't hear them, or some athletic endeavor that will leave you breathing so hard you can't form them. Those are great ideas for later dates, but the first meeting should be about assessing your connection.

Above all, the first date should be casual. Caviar and Cristal at this stage will likely seem pretentious, disingenuous, or even desperate and add an unnecessary weight to what should be a lighthearted encounter. Furthermore, if you're meeting a lot of site members, your wallet will empty quickly unless you budget your dates.

Speaking of wallets, as the evening draws to a close, the inevitable question of who's paying for what will arise. Dates with those you've met online generally follow the same etiquette that you're accustomed to with everyone else--in other words, none, so expect the same confusion over who's supposed to pick up the tab. Many women these days offer to split the bill but hope the men refuse as a sign of courtesy, while others genuinely want to pay their own way as a matter of principle or a concession to fairness.

Personally, I like to go dutch at least until there's an established relationship so that there's no chance my date will feel I owe him something, and I recommend the same policy to other women. The more expensive the date, the more essential this is. Furthermore, the meal ticket attitude that some women have toward men with whom they have no intention of developing a relationship makes me uneasy. Girls, if you know as soon as you lay eyes on the guy that you'd rather kiss an orc, don't smirk behind your forkful of filet mignon while he forks over the cash. Unless he's Mark Zuckerberg and earns money just by breathing, help the guy out!

By the time your date has wrapped, you'll probably know whether your ping-pong tournament has resulted in a match or a zero score. From here on, if both of you want to play, the game of love proceeds the same as it would if you'd met at work, through friends, or in line at the grocery store. Whether or not you reach level three, an ongoing relationship, isn't dependent on how you met but on where you go from here, and you have the same odds of staying together as any other couple. That's why you should consider yourself a successful online dater even when you don't progress beyond level two.

However, if your date isn't so keen on a rematch, be prepared for him or her to disappear. Although this isn't the most polite way of communicating disenchantment, online daters seem prone to fall into the black holes of cyberspace when no longer interested, perhaps encouraged by the anonymity of the medium. If two follow-up calls and/or emails from you are met with silence, accept the member's decision to forfeit the game and move on. Repeatedly contacting someone who has made it clear, in word or in action, that he or she doesn't want further contact, can be perceived as harassment and could get you banned from the site.

But if you and your date don't hit it off, don't worry. If you've made it to level two once, you've acquired the skills to make it there again...and beyond! Internet matchmaking sites are not the holy grail of the dating world, and they hold no magic potion for singles seeking mates. As in the "real world," you'll go on a lot of dates, and most of them won't be with someone you could fall for. But dating sites do provide a venue to meet a lot of singles in a short span of time, and those sheer numbers dramatically increase your chances of finding someone sooner rather than later. So check out the newbies, serve up your best introductory emails...and wait for the volley!



Have you ever gone out with someone you met on an Internet dating site? If so, what advice can you give to other singles about that crucial first meeting? Do you have any success stories or--God forbid--horror stories to relate about people you met through online dating sites?


Fun Link of the Day


(Although I'm no fan of The Rules, if you have the urge to find out why, read it for yourself.)


Clever Elsie is a freelance writer and a successful online dater. If you need help making your online dating profile the best it can be, finding matches, or polishing your emails to potential dates, please contact her for rates and more information.

Do you have a question for Clever Elsie about online dating or some other aspect of the single life? Write in, and you just might see your question posted in a Singletude Q&A!

Tips for Online Dating Success, Part III

Here it is, the third installment you've all been waiting for! Yes, you can sit back from the edge of your seat and stop biting your nails now. :P

Previously, we covered tips for creating a successful online profile. Now that you've posted your bio and smiling pics minus exes and phantom limbs, we'll concentrate on how to attain level one of Internet dating, reciprocal communication. Then, we'll wrap up with "Part IV," which should send you on your way to an actual date!



6. MAKE THE MOST OF YOUR TIME AND MONEY.

This tip I've never seen recommended anywhere, although I'm sure there are other enterprising people who've figured it out on their own. In case you haven't, I'm offering it to you upfront: You don't have to pay for paid dating services.

Most online dating sites let you create a profile free of charge, and some even let you respond to other members, but few allow you to initiate contact, which, as we'll see, is important. However, many dating sites give out free trials of three to seven days. These deals usually stipulate that you hand over your credit card and register for a subscriber package but permit you to cancel your subscription within the trial period. As long as you remember to cancel, you have several days to milk the service for all it's worth. Here's how:


A. Before you register, take an afternoon and complete the search process described below in 7. (Yes, it probably will take a whole afternoon if you're thorough, so set aside a day when you have no commitments.) Make a list of singles who interest you.

B. As soon as you register for your free trial, follow step 8. and write to all the singles on your list. Let them know you're just checking out the site on a free trial and may not continue your subscription or simply say that your subscription ends in ___ days. Then ask them to contact you outside the service at a personal email address. (You can create a free account for this purpose at Google, Yahoo, or any other email provider if you don't already have an address that you feel comfortable sharing with strangers.) Be forewarned that some dating services take pains to mask anything in your communication that resembles an email address, so when in doubt, write it out (eg., "Mary1983 at Gmail" instead of "Mary1983@gmail.com"). Non-subscribing members are such an enormous slice of the online dating population that most paying members expect to receive some communications like this and, if they like your profile, will probably be happy to write to you off the site.

C. Invariably, a few members will answer through the site anyway, sometimes because Big Brother Dating Service managed to filter out your address, sometimes for other reasons. This is why you should send out your emails as soon as you subscribe. You want to have as much time as possible to answer anyone who responds to you through the site as well as to monitor their activities via subscriber privileges that reveal who's looked at your profile, read your email, added you to their list of favorites, etc.

D. Be sure to cancel your subscription before the trial period ends or you may be charged for a full month or more!


Obviously, if you take this hit-and-run approach to online dating, you'll be limited to the current crop of profiles, and you might occasionally miss a response. Plus, most Internet dating services restrict free trials to one a year or less, so if you don't get lucky the first time, you're out of luck for at least 12 months. But if saving money is important to you and you're willing to pack a lot of effort into a few days and leave the rest to chance, this could be the perfect compromise between big, overpriced, feature-rich matchmaking services and free dating sites with only 10 members, eight of whom live in Calcutta.


7. TAKE THE INITIATIVE.

Don't sit around waiting for your soulmate to drop out of the sky! Unless you've signed up on a very small startup site, this is a big haystack, and there are lots of needles besides you. Instead of making your future date go fish, throw him or her a line. Most online dating sites have a search feature. Use it!

Depending on the site, the search capabilities may be quite rich. Take advantage. The more specific you are, the greater the probability that you'll find the person you're looking for. If your search only returns 20 profiles, you can always broaden it, but as a benchmark, I used to live in a town of about 30,000, and when I searched within a 50-mile radius, the engine always returned the maximum number of profiles allowable in one search, so don't underestimate the dating pool in your region even if you live in a small town.

(A word to the wise, though: If you do live in a remote area, you may be tempted to widen your travel range, but if you're seeking a serious relationship, be honest with yourself about how far you're willing to travel on a regular basis. Even an hour's drive each way can become tiring very quickly and put undue strain on a new relationship.)

When browsing the search results, don't immediately skip over profiles with photos that don't quite match your ideal. First see if the profile includes other photos that may give you a fuller picture--literally--of what the member looks like. Even then, if the single in question has a profile that really speaks to you, don't rule him or her out before a face-to-face meeting. Sometimes people aren't that photogenic, and more than once I've been surprised by how attractive someone was in person after assuming the worst from unflattering photos.

Speaking of that profile, READ it carefully. Don't let a gorgeous photo blind you in its angelic light! It doesn't matter if that guy looks like your favorite actor's long-lost twin if he wants a practicing Catholic with blond hair and a PhD when you're an agnostic brunette who dropped out of college to start her own business. And who cares if that girl belongs in a Victoria's Secret commercial if she wants a fellow jazz fanatic to go biking with and you think Billie Holiday was a phat dude and a Mongoose is a weasely little animal? You may think you can remake yourself to fit the bill, but ultimately, the strain of pretending to be someone other than you are will leave you unfulfilled and resentful, not to mention how deceptive you'll seem if your sweetheart catches on. So take the logical approach and choose members who are looking for someone like YOU.

That said, if you fall slightly outside someone's guidelines but are a match in other respects, it doesn't hurt to write, mention that you're aware of the discrepancy, and call attention to all the other things you have in common. Many singles are willing to, say, extend their age range by a year or two or their travel range by five or 10 miles for someone who otherwise seems like a great catch.

Conversely, you'll want to be selective, as well. When you have a smorgasbord of singles an email away, it's tempting to send out "winks" willy-nilly without stopping to ask yourself if you're genuinely interested in any of the members you're contacting. Research proves that commonality is a primary indicator of attraction and relationship success, so your top candidates should be those who are similar in interests, values, and lifestyle.

In addition, try to ascertain upfront whether the member's dating goals are compatible with yours. He or she may simplify this for you by stating that he's in the market for a long-term relationship or that she just got out of a committed relationship and wants to date casually, but oftentimes you'll have to read between the lines.

Though this isn't a hard and fast rule, a single who is seeking a serious commitment will often take the time to write a more detailed profile and will have thought about what he or she wants in a partner, reflected in a list of desired qualities that one would expect in "relationship material" (think: intelligence, ambition, a sense of humor, compassion, faithfulness, etc.). There may be references to family values, a longing to reach the "next stage of life" or "settle down," or traditional coupling activities like reading the paper together on Sunday mornings, cooking meals for each other, or taking weekend trips.

On the other hand, an online dater who wants to play the field may write a vague or incomplete bio that reveals next to nothing about him- or herself, list requirements that are mostly based in the physical (i.e. "hot," "in shape," "good dancer," "sensual") or nonspecific requirements that give off the impression it doesn't matter who responds, or use buzzwords and key phrases like "have fun," "just hang," or "likes to party." This member will concentrate on the rip-roaring good times he or she has dancing, drinking, driving fast cars, and maybe even yachting around the world and invite you to join in the fun, but there will be no mention of love, relationships, commitment, or family. While all this may sound romantic, it will probably be a hit-and-run romance, so be forewarned.

Finally, a picture's worth a thousand words, so be a detective and piece together what you can from the snapshots of his or her life. Pictures of him and his family barbecuing, fishing, and camping suggest he's a family-oriented outdoorsman who enjoys simple pleasures. Shots of her in designer clothes at dance clubs, karaoke bars, and VIP lounges imply that dressing up and hitting the town is a big part of her life and that she may have expensive taste. Members post photos of people, places, and events that mean something to them, so you can tell a lot about their interests, values, and expectations just by taking note of how they represent themselves photographically.


8. SEND IT IN A LETTER.

Many online dating sites give you the option of initiating contact with a "wink," "flirt," or "icebreaker," the equivalent of a smile across a crowded room. While it can be reassuring to get a smile in return, some Internet daters, especially women, are inundated with these gestures of affection and can't respond to or even open all of them. Not surprisingly, online dating experts agree that singles are more likely to respond to those who show they're serious and distinguish themselves from the masses by writing an actual message.

This isn't as hard as it sounds, trust me. You don't have to write a novel, and, in fact, you shouldn't. The goal is to intrigue the member as he or she intrigued you, so save the details of your autobiography for coffee or drinks. A concise paragraph or two will do.

So now that the blinking cursor is staring you in the face, what do you write? Since you want your potential date to know you took the time to read his or her profile, referencing it is always a good tactic, especially if you can do so in a clever or humorous way. Careful, though--one man's one-liner is another woman's cheesy pickup line. When in doubt, opt for straightforward sincerity instead. In your own words, tell your prospective date that his or her profile caught your eye because you could relate to so much of it. Then elaborate with examples of how your interests, beliefs, values, experiences, etc. coincide. Remember that similarity increases attraction!

If you want to throw in a compliment, go ahead, but don't go overboard--fawning will make you look desperate--and stay away from comments on his or her appearance. Any member you write to already knows you find him or her attractive, or else you wouldn't have written; what he or she wants to know is whether you're interested in the person behind the flashy grin.

Conclude by inviting him or her to view your profile and respond if interested. If you're a paying member (and if you're not, see 6.), don't immediately solicit contact information or suggest taking the interaction offline. That's too fast for many people, especially women, and can seem stalker-ish. Besides, you want to put the ball squarely in your online crush's court and force him or her to pursue you if interested. (More on that next time.) If you took the time to write a good profile, it will now speak for you, which is exactly why you don't need to write a novel in the first email.

If for some reason you haven't posted a picture on your profile, this is also the time to attach a picture to your message if the dating service will allow it or, if not, to reassure the member that you have a picture and can send it privately. Be aware, though, that some members will not reply to profiles without pictures as a rule, no matter what you promise.

And now we interrupt this regularly scheduled blog post for a special announcement: A lot of members won't reply, maybe even most. Prepare yourself for it and try not to get caught up in the idea that you're getting rejected because you're not "good enough."

There are myriad reasons why site users might not respond, and many of them have nothing to do with your quality as a potential mate. Some of them have nothing to do with you, period. For example, a member may have recently found someone special and stopped answering correspondence even though his or her profile is still visible. Or, as is the case more often than major dating hubs would lead you to believe, you may have unwittingly contacted a non-paying member, who can't write back.

Even when someone isn't attracted to you, it doesn't mean he or she is looking for someone better, just different. Some people are only ever going to be attracted to blue-eyed blondes. Others want an athletic partner who can go jogging, rock climbing, and sky diving with them. Still others are searching for singles who plan on settling down in the suburbs and raising a brood to rival Brangelina's. If you're a brown-eyed brunette who prefers quiet activities like reading and moviegoing and doesn't want kids, that doesn't mean you're not good enough. You're just not what the above members are looking for.

So don't get down on yourself if the most common response you get is silence. If anything, consider yourself lucky to have eliminated someone who wasn't a match without pumping your hard-earned money into a failed date. Now you're one step closer to finding someone who is right for you!

And, whatever you do, don't "stalk" a single who has indicated he or she isn't interested. If you suspect that someone never received your message, send it once more, but if you still hear nothing back, move on. Pestering someone who obviously doesn't want anymore contact could get you banned from the site and certainly won't land you a date.


9. WHEN FROGGY COMES A-COURTIN', SEND A "NO, THANK-YOU" NOTE.

Inevitably, you'll get some unsolicited emails from other site members. If you check out their profiles and like what you see, terrific. If you don't, you can either ignore the communications or respond with a "no, thank you." Some sites are making it easier than ever to let someone down gently by providing form responses.

As a humanist blog, Singletude believes it's preferable to grant the courtesy of a kind "sorry" than to leave someone hanging. But use your best judgment. You don't owe a response to someone who has sent you a vulgar or intimidating message or who persists in contacting you after you've specified that you're not interested. Many dating sites enable you to block members who bother you or, if all else fails, contact management and complain.

BE WARY of anyone who writes to you from another country and/or asks for money for any reason. Report such people immediately. Internet dating fraud is a growing problem that everyone should be on the lookout for.



Ready for the all-important step 10.? Tune in to Singletude very soon for the big reveal! ;)


Have you tried any of the above methods to find potential dates online and encourage them to respond? If so, did you reach the communication stage? What other approaches to online dating have successfully elicited responses from singles you contacted? How do you deal with the inevitable rejections in the search process?


Fun Link of the Day


Clever Elsie is a freelance writer and a successful online dater. If you need help making your online dating profile the best it can be, finding matches, or polishing your emails to potential dates, please contact her for rates and more information.

Do you have a question for Clever Elsie about online dating or some other aspect of the single life? Write in, and you just might see your question posted in a Singletude Q&A!

How to Be Attractive to Singles...and Others, Too

Nerds Do It Better alerted me to this post, 37 Simple Things You Can Do to Be More Attractive to the Opposite Sex. Actually, most of these tips apply not only in romantic situations but in any social environment, whether at work, in school, or with friends. Quite possibly, you'll be familiar with some if not all of them-- be confident, stay in shape, be optimistic, and the like--but the real gems are hidden in the links, which serve up practical and sometimes innovative resources for everything from honing your sense of humor to whitening your teeth with home remedies.

Also, ladies should be especially attentive to the section aimed at women. Although I don't endorse all of them, there are some good pointers here that you don't see every day (i.e. learn to accept a compliment, dress consistently with who you are, etc.). (There's a section for men, too, but I didn't find the advice there to be out of the ordinary.)

I thought I'd round out the list with Singletude's own recommendations for increasing your attraction factor, whether your goal is dating, friend finding, job hunting, party crashing, or anything else that demands you make a good impression:


1. Cultivate your interests. Interesting people have interesting skills, hobbies, and goals. If you sack out on the couch every night like a lumpy potato, stop vegging and start juicing up your life with those guitar lessons you keep postponing or that novel you always wanted to write. Well-rounded singles have more entrees to conversation, are more impressive to others, and are more fun to talk to. Besides, you never know when that newly acquired talent for gargling while playing the kazoo will land you a job...or at least fifteen minutes of fame.

2. Find a job that you like...or, better yet, love. Singles who like what they do for a living radiate a positive, satisfied glow that attracts others like moths to flame. Because these individuals are living self-actualized lives, others admire them and are inspired by them. Conversely, people who are forever whining about intolerable job situations can be pretty intolerable themselves. If you're unhappy in your current career and envision yourself on another path, you owe it to yourself to try on a different job hat for size. As a bonus, you may find others responding favorably to your newfound happiness and zest for life.

3. Be open-minded. To new ideas, new people, new places, new activities. A healthy sense of adventure is attractive, as is respect for others' opinions and modes of life, even if you disagree with them. If you freeze out others on first contact, you might miss out on some terrific opportunities to have fun and develop relationships. You know the phrase "don't knock it till you try it"? Well, tattoo that on your brain.

4. Be personable. Go out of your way to introduce yourself, strike up a conversation, or offer help when needed. People naturally gravitate toward those who seem to like them. (This is called reciprocal liking.) In other words, you have to be friendly to win friends.

5. Be present. Ah, yes, "live for the moment." You've heard it a thousand times before. But what does it mean? Singles who are "in the moment" are excited about who and what is around them. They pay attention to those they're with and revel in their current circumstances rather than moping about the past or procrastinating until the future. If you regularly battle with these demons, realize that nothing you do today can change the past, but you're building the foundation for the future right now, in the present, so everything you do from hereon out counts. You need to give 110%! Some people may have a hard time being present because of depression. If you suspect you're one of them, please see a therapist so you can regain your ability to enjoy the present. Remember: the present is the gift you give yourself. ;)

6. Carry the conversation. Somewhere between email, voice mail, and text messaging, the art of conversation began to die out. These days, articulate, communicative people are hard to come by. Yet conversation lays the groundwork for human interaction and continues to build and support a relationship throughout its lifespan. Singles who master the art of verbal expression have an advantage on the dating scene as well as on the job. But you don't have to be the next Shakespeare or Byron to talk a good talk. Just be enthusiastic, listen carefully, and keep up your end of the conversation. Don't expect your conversational partner to entertain you since that can be stressful for him or her and ultimately create an unfavorable impression. If you find yourself running out of things to say, ask questions. Most people like to talk about themselves and will be flattered you asked.

7. Connect to a higher power. Have you ever been in the presence of a spiritual teacher, maybe a nun or yogi or rabbi, and felt a deep sense of peace just sitting and listening to them? The sense of calm and purpose that permeates the lives of people of faith can be contagious. If you often feel irritable and stressed and are searching for meaning in life, make it a point to delve into spiritual traditions that interest you. Once you're more centered in your beliefs, you may find that, as a happy side effect, people are drawn to you. Notice I said "side effect," though. A spiritual transformation has to be something that evolves naturally out of your own desire for it. If you try to force it out of ulterior motives, others will see through the shallow depths of your disguise.

8. Know yourself. Your likes and dislikes. Your opinions. Your values. Your beliefs. Singles who are in touch with themselves have more to offer to others. If you've ever been around someone who had no distinct thoughts of his or her own, you probably know what I mean. People like to share and sometimes debate ideas, and if you haven't figured out what yours are, you're in danger of coming across as though you have all the personality of a bologna sandwich. In contrast, people who know themselves can be confident and decisive in conversation because they don't need to hem and haw and mull over how to present the best facade. If you're confused about who you are, try writing some lists of things that make you happy or unhappy, causes you believe in, pet peeves, etc. Instead of disengaging from controversial topics, watch the news or read the paper and monitor your responses to the headlines. You might also try journaling to force yourself to verbalize your feelings.


Including the original 37 tips on Nerds Do It Better's list, that brings us to a total of 45 things you can do to make yourself more attractive to others! So why are you still here reading? Go get started!


What would you add to this list of ways to be a more attractive person? Have you or someone you know tried any of these pointers and found that they did or didn't work?





Fun Link of the Day