Posts filed under ‘relationships’
duh! news of the day
* MSNBC is pretty cutting edge (please read into the sarcasm there). Their resident sexpert recently rattled this off trying to explain why men would enjoy a ménage à trois: “the universal fantasy is for a guy to be with two very hot, basically heterosexual women who are so turned on by the guy they lose all control and play with each other.” I’m sure four breasts as opposed to two has nothing to do with it.
* The NYTimes examines the first study on friends with benefits and discovers the situation is often awkward and stressful. Well, I definitely could have told you that.
why do we always blame the other woman?
Confession time: I’ve been the “other woman.” I can honestly say it’s never a position a woman wants to be in, but sometimes out of lust or loneliness or just plain stupidity a woman finds herself entangled with an already taken man.
Britain’s Daily Mail offers a good question though: Why do we always blame the other woman when men have an affair?
The Anti-Hero Hero is Hot
Filming recently began on a big screen adaptation to the wildly successful HBO sitcom Sex and the City. And because I own all seven DVDs (before you IMDB it, there were two DVDs for Season 6), watch the Season Two finale religiously after a breakup (try it, I swear by that and greasy Krystal burgers) and use Samantha quotes as bar pickup lines, it pains me to admit this, but I think the fairy tale is over.
As a young 20-something I have fervently held onto the belief that my own Mr. Big, my very special Mr. Right, was just right around the corner. But maybe my Jane Austen-loving self has been misled by Hallmark fueled holidays and happily ever after messages.
Maybe we are just disheartening ourselves into thinking our perfect match is just listlessly waiting for us.
If pop culture truly is the barometer of mass culture perhaps we’re now being force-fed a new message.
The anti-heroes of cinema (think loserish Ben in this summer’s hit Knocked Up) and television (think the lovable dorks of The Pick Up Artist) and our own campus (how cute is silver-foxed Jeremy Foley, the only division I athletic director to garner national titles in both football and basketball) have all replaced the traditional white knights.
Chances are you probably know, or are, an anti-hero. You know the type – spending too many hours playing World of Warcraft, quoting Will Ferrell movies constantly and probably in need of cleaning their bedrooms.
Story time – I saw Knocked Up in the movie theater this summer and left feeling horribly disappointed. Sure it was hysterical, but Katherine Heigel’s character seemed far too put together to actually like slacker Ben. A drunken one-night-stand seemed plausible enough, but for her to then fall for Seth Rogen’s character seemed the kind of stuff produced only in male fantasyland.
Fast forward to last night when I watched the DVD with my boyfriend. Not even halfway through I found myself staring at him out of the corner of my eye, a continuous “oh my god” repeating in my head. My boyfriend was of the Ben mold.
Thing is, I couldn’t be happier.
The anti-hero may not look like Brad Pitt, but his sweet, self-deprecating soul is incredibly more worthwhile and endearing than a six-pack.
My larger point – these movies and television shows work because they’re honest.
Life is unexpected and often a mess, sometimes the best you can do is muddle your way through it. And if you have someone warm and funny to do that with, well, there’s really nothing better.
I’ve spent a large majority of my life looking for what I thought Prince Charming should be, only to end up depressed and disillusioned.
I’m not advocating lowering your standards. I am advising, however, that you alter them. It’s not about what these men lack, it’s about their undiscovered depth and their earnest desire to just make someone else happy.
Sex and the City did get something right, however. In an early episode Mr. Big tells Carrie, who is concerned about Big’s past relationships with several model-types, that sometimes you just want to be with the one who makes you laugh.
Thing is, the moral doesn’t just apply to females. Both genders could stand to gain a lot from looking beyond the surface. Often times it’s our flaws that make us both beautiful and lovable.
Let’s face it – the anti-hero hero is pretty hot.
How Do You Ask For What You Really Want In Bed?
My boy has a consistent bedtime routine: He brushes his teeth, sets his alarm and logs on to ESPN.com to check his fantasy baseball ranking and the homepage of his beloved Astros. I quickly learned I could tease him about his OCD-esque nightly redundancy, but I could never slight his Houston heroes.
What he liked sexually in the bedroom proved harder to learn.
As a sex columnist and general sexual connoisseur, I was naturally eager to hear exactly what he’s into.
“I don’t know,” he responded, turning away from me in bed. “The normal stuff, I guess.” He started snoring five minutes later.
I remained vigilant but downtrodden. Sadly, because of societal taboos, much of our sexual selves remains cloaked in darkness, lit only by the dim, neon glow of a computer screen streaming porn when we’re alone.
My theory regarding both relationships and sex, however, is that they thrive on communication and honesty.
I asked my boy what he liked not only because I want to please him, but also because it would open up the discussion to explain what I like.
Wouldn’t we both be more satisfied if we each got what we wanted (within reason) out of our sex life? Wouldn’t we all?
Sadly, however, it’s a slippery slope, and many of us are afraid of being embarrassed or judged.
So how do you talk to your partner about what you really want in bed?
Lying in my own bed right after he closed his laptop, I opened up. I discovered that by beginning the sharing, I could both break the ice and set the pattern of acceptance. He quickly followed suit.
While it’s often easy to share your favorite movies or best childhood memories, delving into the sexual subconscious is understandably more difficult.
The boy and I were luckily able to talk openly, and we decided together what to venture into.
My friend found herself in the same predicament when she started dating her boyfriend a few months ago. She decided to gauge her new guy’s response to her favorite fantasy by hiding it in a story about one of her friends.
“Jessica is really into ______,” she slyly suggested. “She is trying to get this new guy she’s seeing into it also. What do you think she should do?”
Opening up dialogue is key, and sometimes avoiding the first person and making insinuations allows discussions to flow with ease. Amazingly, your partner is probably not as dense as you think.
Try renting porn with that particular act or scenario in it. Visit X-Mart. Where better to begin a discussion about sex than in a sex store?
I don’t at all advocate sacrificing your own internal compass or engaging in anything you’re not completely comfortable with, but be open enough to consider experimenting.
The Astros may not make the playoffs this season, but at least now my own sex life is a home run.
In Defense of the Hookup and my Column
what many of you blog readers don’t know is that I also write a weekly column for my college newspaper. indeed what I love about this blog is that most of the columns and commentaries I post here are the uneditted versions of those and as such I can be a bit more blunt.
my last column, the hookup piece that is posted below, fueled some nasty comments from readers of the newspaper’s online site. it also sent me some interesting Facebook messages and promoted a very complimentary Letter to the Editor in my defense.
still, I felt my own voice needed to be heard. I just now (read 6 minutes ago) sent the following to my editor in the hopes that it will be publised and my message (and yes somewhat selfishly me own repuation) will be clarified and defended.
below, is that attempt. enjoy.
IN DEFENSE OF MY COLUMN AND MYSELF
In the past I have abstained from further comments on my articles. I think most speak for themselves. However, I couldn’t resist defending my September 19 column.
I recently had a friend who, gasp, was a former hookup partner of mine, stop me on Gameday to tell me he didn’t like this past week’s column very much. Everyone he knows engages in hook ups to some degree, he said, I was simply stating the obvious.
The reaction I have received regarding this column, however, speaks to the contrary.
From people stopping me on the street to random Facebook messages, a letter to the editor and a dozen comments posted on the online version of my column seem to signal that my intent on writing the column is justified – people all have opinions on hookups.
My aim in writing the column was two-fold.
For one, I always try to examine an issue that appeals to a large cross-section of students, and I think this does. I find it less than ironic that most of the negative feedback has come from the alumni, while much of the positive reaction has come from currently enrolled students.
I’m not at all saying that there are not important lessons to be learned from the past. I’m a history major who tried to put the whole “phenomena” into context by using an example from our not so distance past.
My own mother (who was a college student during the early ‘70s and is probably my biggest critic) read the piece and thought I had an excellent point, her only substantial comment being that “pu pu platter” was not spelled “puu puu platter,” an error which the keen copy editors at the newspaper thankfully caught.
My second aim is probably more important. I was trying to preach acceptance. I make it very clear that key to the hookup is safety (using condoms, birth control, etc.) and willingness (not being too drunk, not feeling peer pressure, etc.). I do agree that without those essential elements a hookup is not worth it.
Lastly, I want to address those who personally attacked me. Not that I care, but my boyfriend does. You see I am currently in a committed relationship. This article has less to do with my own sexual history and more to do with acceptance of a lifestyle that is very common on college campuses nationwide.
To those who wonder who would marry me, let me reiterate that my significant other knows about my past, I know about his. Perhaps shocking to some, he likes me because of my honesty, open-mindedness and wit and does not chastise me for my past, conscious choices. Truth is they all led me to have a successful relationship with him. Couldn’t many of you alumni say the same? Is a large part of college not experimentation meant to direct the course of the rest of your life?
Perhaps the column was more necessary then my friend (former hookup) acknowledged.
Hookups are part of our collegiate culture; I won’t back peddle on that. Why not try to then lift them from their subversiveness and accept people who engage in all realms of sexual behavior? Once again, safety for one’s sexual and mental wellbeing, as well as that of others, is pivotal.
A healthy attitude regarding sexuality is crucial to our societies success. Everyone engages in sex, it’s what life is, why then do people feel the need to make other’s feel shameful for what they feel or want? The only answer I can think to offer is fear.
Call me a slut if you wish, I truly take it as a badge of honor now. Because if the word slut denotes voicing your opinion, wishing for sexual equality among sexes and being a proponent of all types of sexual lifestyles, then I will proudly wear that title.
Thank you Michael Walker for reminding me why I love my job and why a sex column, which is deemed purely fluffy entertainment by some (and to my own omission sometimes is), is also so important. We all still have so much to learn and discuss.
Hookups: Just Another Item on the Sexual Pu Pu Platter?
Everywhere I turn it seems someone (usually someone older than 30) is bashing the so-called “hookup culture.” And yet I know only a handful of people who don’t somehow engage in it.
As I’ve come to know it, a “hookup” is a catchall phrase for a brief sexual encounter ranging from kissing to intercourse. “Subversive,” “demoralizing” and “unfulfilling” are the terms most associated with the act. For women especially, the stigma is intense.
To the critics, I offer this: You are retrograde and narrow-minded.
In the 1960s counterculture, the idea of “free love” was conceived and immediately linked with promiscuity and deviance. But “free love” was much more than that. It never advocated unhealthy sexual relationships. Instead, it advanced the idea that love and sexual relationships should be free of government and religious jurisdiction.
“Free love” allows me to have this very job because it attempted to lift the taboo associated with allowing sex to be a normal part of public discourse.
Hookups today are similarly attacked for not falling within society’s predefined courtship patterns.
I can’t help but think there’s more than one way to skin a cat.
For as long as I can remember, education has taught us there is no set way of doing things. Who’s to say that our hookup culture is not making us more sexually savvy?
For me, hookups have been both rewarding and unsatisfying experiences. I have learned a good deal about myself sexually, have felt powerful and sexy by engaging in a sexual act for only the pure pleasure it brings, and have freed up time I would usually spend fostering a relationship, devoting it instead to my schoolwork and career aims.
At the same time, I have felt sad on some occasions when my hookup partner did not call me or when I craved a deeper emotional connection. But can’t the same sentiments be applied to so-called “normal” relationships as well? There will always be favorable returns as well as disappointments in any relationship.
The basic question I see here is this: Can sex, or more broadly, sexual acts without love, still be gratifying? For me, the answer is a resounding yes. For others, that is not always the case – and that is perfectly acceptable too.
Maybe what’s lacking in our culture’s view on sexuality is an open mind for people who engage in both hookups and traditionally defined relationships.
As long as you are engaging in an act of your own free will while being safe doing so, is it really so harmful? Central to that equation is communication, which is the cornerstone to all relationships.
Perhaps I simply view “the hookup” as another item to be enjoyed on the sexual pu pu platter.
Like “free love” before it, hookups extol an important virtue: Love and sex exist in various forms, none of which should be judged or controlled.
Saying Goodbye to the Single Life
I had an entirely different column written and submitted to my editor a few hours before my Tuesday 5 p.m. deadline. It was about trusting your gut when it comes to the dating realm.
Truth is, I was denying mine.
Over the last few weeks I have casually been seeing a new guy. Casually would be an understatement. When he texts, I roll my eyes. Calls me, I cringe. Tries to kiss me, I back away.
I’ve said it before, but I’ll say it again: I am completely terrified of letting go of my single status.
What’s weird is that I always know what guidance to give my friends regarding dating or how to maneuver any sexual situation. I’m the go-to gal when answers are needed about your relationship.
So why can I never heed my own advice?
Why is beginning a relationship so scary?
I have completely engineered the entire situation with my new man. When I am out and drunk and want some attention, I call him. When I need a large object in my house moved, he’s the one to do it. When I’m feeling bad about myself, he’s there.
Yes, I’m a horrible bitch. You can send me hate letters.
Thing is, my new guy is incredibly nice. He epitomizes the “good guy” we all search for. He is responsive, communicates constantly, and is beloved by my friends. I have no doubt that he would be here for me.
Having to rely on someone else and to give up my thrill seeking, happy-go-lucky ways is still petrifying to me. But perhaps growing up means not being so inherently selfish?
Maybe when I wrote about trusting your instincts over the opinions of everyone else I failed to realize that I was being hypocritical.
Relationships cannot exist in a bubble; they are subject to the scrutiny of the outside world. Believing in what you have with another person is the only remedy. No one knows what happens in those private hours at night, and no one has to.
My friend cornered me the other day. She likes a guy who she never imagined she would. He’s completely different from her, and she’s completely smitten. Afraid to admit her admiration to others, she asked me what to do.
“It’s so simple,” I sagely suggested, “YOU like him, what more do you need?”
I will acknowledge, like most things, it’s much easier said then done.
For some of us, myself included, the baggage of past relationships makes it difficult to trust. For others it takes strength to accept that someone wants to care for you. Still some are overly concerned about what their peers think.
My initial column was correct in many regards. Trusting your instincts is arguably one of the most difficult aspects of dating. It’s also the most necessary.
There is never a connect-the-dots formula to finding happiness, but what’s beautiful about the process is that sometimes unexpected things happen.
Sometimes columns need rewrites.
Sex Cred with Dr. Ruth
mtvU the version of MTV that plays on college campuses nationwide (think inside the Reitz) has a new show with renowned sexpert (and my new Facebook friend!) Dr. Ruth. You should definitely check it out, this week’s short (roughly 4-min) episode asks the question: is college life conducive to abstinence?
SEX CRED WITH DR. RUTH
More incentive to watch? How fabulous would it be to see yours truly on the show?
You know you wanna write in and tell mtvU that UF students, and more aptly their sex lives, need representation!
what are we willing to sacrifice to make a relationship work?
Lately I’ve been studying my coupled-up friends, trying to dissect what exactly makes a relationship work. The cynic in me keeps coming back to the same question: What are these people giving up?
That sounds horrible, I know. And I’m sure that anyone in a good relationship will argue that the benefits of having someone there far outweigh any desire to eat cookie dough on the couch while crying to “The Notebook.” But that’s not what I mean.
Yes, I will admit that I am a bit of a relationship-phobe who has at times sought out men who could never be with me. (Psychology majors, take heed – I’m well aware of the mounds of therapy I will eventually need to combat this.) But I’m referring to losing a part of you in your quest to become a twosome.
What are we willing to sacrifice?
My friend’s boyfriend hates going down on her. He has actually suggested that it should be saved for special occasions or when they’re in the shower. He ironically (and in this sexpert’s mind, wrongly) has no problem having her tend to his south-of-the-border. In the past my friend has proclaimed that getting oral is her favorite sexual act. Should she be willing to go without just because of his irrational belief?
I posed the same question to a former roommate of mine over lunch. For as long as I have known her she has been in one serious relationship or another, so it seemed logical that she’d be able to clue me in.
“You really only surrender your time,” she sagely suggested, “assuming it’s the right person.”
I was still confused.
“But nothing about who you are as a person changed by being in such serious relationships? And you never really had to forgo much to have them work?” She put her sandwich down. “Not really.”
My hunger for a satisfying answer kept growing.
Obviously, there are certain things we each want out of a relationship. I, for one, would love someone who looks like George Clooney and can cook. Perhaps, however, I need to realize that having someone who may not be skilled in the culinary arts is a reality I need to accept.
Maybe the answer really is as simple as my former roomie suggested. For those who matter, you sacrifice.
Maybe relationships work like a scale and when the payoff potential seems great, you give of yourself, and when the rewards seem insubstantial, you don’t.
Maybe it’s about forfeiting little things and putting the energy once spent on those little things into the relationship itself.
Not talking to your ex, abstaining from a girls night out and watching an action movie are all relatively easy tasks. Not receiving head? Well, it takes a bigger romantic than me.
random news for 8.10.07
*19 year old UF student wins a million bucks on TV game show. note to self – meet jaime sadler and convince him to cover your bar tab.
*if naked on university ave were to engage in phone sex (we’re neither denying nor admitting to anything here!), this is how we’d do it. the gPod is a vibrator designed to respond automatically to sounds picked up by an accompanying handset, which can plug into anything from a telephone to a music player to a television. interactive porn anyone?
*the Treasury Department is considering a new rule that would require companies to put alcoholic content, serving sizes and nutritional information on all alcoholic drink packaging. here’s a cheat sheet in regards to carbs: michelob ultra < miller light < bud light
* i feel as though i could have written this, but I’ll post it anywayz –>sex advice from bouncers. my fav tidbit: shaving your pubic hair to read ‘hi’ would be a good idea or into a shamrock which 21 year old Thomas says would be “nifty.”
* the 20 most romantic books ever written. Wuthering Heights, Pride and Prejudice, Romeo and Juliet, Jane Eyre and Gone With the Wind top list. i’ve read 4 outa the 5. i’m such a chick.
* on polar opposite news – the male scale lists, on a sliding gradient, the 10 male archetypes. my friend’s a “Jason Bourne” type. i go for the “Hemingway” type – tragic, alcoholic, brilliant, misogynists have always kinda been my thing. which are you or who is your type?
meat news for 8.10.07
* I’m pretty stereotypical – my go-to fantasy usually involves George Cloney as my professor punishing me for being tardy – but for those of you who dream about grungy, granola eating hippies or just vegetarians in general we’ve got some bad news for you – new trend report finds that vegans won’t even engage in sexual activities with carnivores. One says – “I would not want to be intimate with someone whose body is literally made up from the bodies of others who have died for their sustenance.” I’m a meat eater (insert joke here_____) but in all seriousness any group that would exclude another sexually is just nutso to me. why limit your options?
*in other meat news – ladies looking to land a lad better eat some. this NY Times article says that those ladies who order a burger on their first date have a much higher success rate in scoring a second dinner. why? b/c their carnivore ways say – i’m low maintenance and unneurotic. sweet! any excuse for a New York strip or bacon cheeseburger is a-ok with me!
Higher utility + fulfilling my ideal “type” mold = perfect potential boyfriend?
Researchers at the University of Texas at Austin recently came out with a list of 237 reasons we have sex.
It made me think about two things. Are there actually 237 ways to say “I was just horny”? Are there actually people who are able to categorically delineate 237 reasons to begin with?
And that’s when I realized these researchers do what we all do – overanalyze our relationships.
I, for one, characterize and classify all of mine. I have specific journal entries charting what type of men I’m most attracted to.
I once kept track of if I got more action with my hair curly or straight. There was even an accompanying graph. I constantly, scientifically, dissect every call, text and Facebook Wall post from prospective men.
In general, I approach my love life like a science fair project, complete with a unique taxonomy of its own.
My periodic table of men would look something like this:
Mercury, which is toxic to humans in large doses, would be the barfly I enjoy despite the fact that he’s horrible for me.
Carbon, the most essential element for life, would be the guy I completely like but unfortunately cannot be with.
Sexually there’s a clear ranking:
Gold would be the bartender I have phenomenal sex with but would never consider dating.
Silver would go to the older man with whom I learned a lot about sex.
Bronze is the frat guy for whom I have always had a weird, undying passion.
Helium is stable, non-reactive and, to generalize, fairly commonplace. This is the guy who really likes me, but I’m on the fence about him. Neodymium, a somewhat useless earth metal with a cool name, is the dude I call when I’m desperate.
Now consider that each of these man elements fulfills a need for me. For scientific purposes we’ll call it their utility. And you thought you’d never be able to apply those econ principles practically!
There are the men who do it for me physically, those who fulfill an emotional need and those who raise my self-esteem.
Add into the equation that I probably won’t talk to a guy under six feet, I prefer shaggy hair (I like to be able to hold onto something), and for some reason that totally eludes me, I tend to pick thinner men. Most importantly, guys have to make me laugh.
Those man elements with a higher prospective utility combined with a greater frequency of fitting into my “type” mold should theoretically make for perfect potential mates.
I know, I’m crazy.
But I’m not alone. Amazon.com lists 161,852 books about dating approaches and advice. You get matched on 29 scientifically proven dimensions of compatibility at eHarmony.com.
Scientists spend hours and billions of dollars identifying the hormones in the brain that contribute to romantic love and sexual attraction.
Here’s the irony: My life tends to go to pieces when I overanalyze things, whether it’s my relationships, my schoolwork, even this column, though let’s hope not this week.
More telling, I’m still single. So besides being funny fodder for my column, what use are all these hypotheses and formulas except to keep me from meeting someone whose qualities and values don’t neatly wrap up in a package in my mind?
Perhaps the secrets of the mating game defy academia? Maybe if I stopped charting and predicting and simply went with the flow, I would find Mr. Right – or at least Mr. Right Now.
But then again, what else would I do with my free time – actually study?
The point: living in a hypothetical reality only distracts you from the real world filled with real people. Overanalyzing never gets you anywhere. Instead, we should just sit back and let nature run its course. Perhaps what’s beautiful about science is that it continually suggests that all this chaos can’t be meaningless – things, and more pertinently relationships, ultimately play out for a reason. Just enjoy the ride.
The Virginity Mystique
GREAT ARTICLE: The Virginity Mystique in The Nation
my fav highlights:
“Most retro about the call for modesty is that it once again implies that women’s actions are somehow responsible for men’s. Since men simply cannot control themselves, poor things, women should shroud their bodies in cloth and desperately guard their virginity so as to quash men’s dishonorable intentions.”
“You have to be living under a rock not to notice that casual sex, once an expression of a subversive impulse, is now certifiably pop culture.”
“What the hookup culture does reveal is an unconscious impulse to somehow redefine sex for our current cultural climate.”
“Regardless of the (sometimes harmful) results of one-night stands or sex before high school, these women are looking to experiment, to find a contrast to immediate, eternal companionship”
“The culture has not yet carved out a space for women to indulge their own fantasies rather than to fulfill those of men.Feminism has not finished its job; a version of nonmushy, nonmarital sex that makes women feel good about themselves is still hard to achieve.”
“It takes maturity and self-awareness, but many women take sexual mistakes in stride while still feeling ultimately satisfied with their sex (and, yes, love) lives. Forced expectations, whether the pressure to be sexual or the pressure to be chaste, always hurts. ”
“Sex is the ultimate risk, a risk that makes human relationships complicated, intoxicating and wonderful. It is a risk that women are finally allowed to take without being chastised for it. “
news for 7.11.07
* b/c there are so many randy coin collectors out there? and b/c proof was needed that missouri really is the “show me” state? porn parody state quarters?
* shocking news! new study confirms women wear the pants in most marriages
* how to survive a dry-spell, 9 steps from one of Manhattan’s premiere sex counselors…oddly enough it doen’t include my go-to tactic: drunk texting your exs
* one of my favorite words ‘ginormous’ (i just checked and i’ve used it twice on my blog…) is being added to the Merriam-Webster dictionary along with crunk (“style of Southern rap music”) and smackdowns (“contests in entertainment wrestling”) and a slew of other words. now all i need is for them to add ‘absofuckinlutely’ and i will never have to use the ‘ignore all’ spell-check button again!
* Sex and the City is officially coming to the big screen – but is a movie version necessary asks NY Mag? Absofuckinlutely.
naked on university avenue 