SUMMARY:
Whether you are a 'baby dyke', a newly out older woman or someone
who has just been away from the 'dating scene' for a time, this
book is an essential tool in your belt. Not only does Ms. Baeli
provide thought provoking answers to all those obvious questions we
all have, but you might find some information here about scenarios
you had never even considered. Read it cover to cover or jump to
the section you're most interested in, either way you will come
away with plenty to think about. And a few chuckles along the
way!
~Noni Nelson
"This is an excellent source of information for the new and/or young lesbian. It is sort of like a beginners manual rather than an all-inclusive in-depth treatise on all subjects concerning lesbians, sex, and dating. Just about right for my niece, a newly out college student, it will be an educational present for her birthday. I am hoping that Ms Baeli will write a similar manual for the older set of lesbians, who could use advice specifically aimed at internet tips, modern dating protocol, and health concerns for the older sexually active lesbian."
~InternetDating.com
“If there were a ‘user’s manual’ for lesbians, this would be it. Baeli attempts to clarify the questions and provide the answers to some of the most pressing issues that young or new lesbians might have–and accomplishes her goal effectively. She does this with integrity, great insight, sincerity as well as a generous dose of sometimes scathing humor.”
~Lightswitcher Books
“A great gift for emerging lesbians, curious lesbians and any other lesbian who wishes to find and maintain quality relationships, while avoiding the usual pitfalls of online dating, real-time dating, commitment, and intimacy.”
~KIWI Club Reviews
The Art of Dating, Relationships & Sex for the Discerning Lesbian
Copyright 2008-2013 Karma
Kensington
Publisher: Indie Literati Press
Colorado & New Zealand
ISBN: 9781458020949
Smashwords Edition, License Statement
This ebook is licensed for your personal enjoyment only. This ebook may not be re-sold or given away to other people. If you would like to share this book with another person, please purchase an additional copy for each reader. If you’re reading this book and did not purchase it, or it was not purchased for your use only, then please return to Smashwords.com and purchase your own copy. Thank you for respecting the hard work of this author.
The Art of Dating, Relationships & Sex for the Discerning Lesbian
Karma Kensington
These are my opinions, and you are entitled to your own. Should your opinions differ from mine, I encourage you write your own book.
I'm no one famous. I don't have a degree in Psychology, or Sociology or Human Sexuality, even though I continue to study in those and many other disciplines on my own. I'm something of an autodidact. The degree for which I attended college for 8 years is in Professional Writing and Editing. I understand that most books in this subject area are somehow made more credible by the celebrity or professional respect a person has established in his or her life. This doesn't preclude the many people out there with the ability to learn and to write, who also have something to say about the human experience. If I didn't believe I was one of those people, I wouldn't have written this book.
While the information provided herein is sometimes anecdotal and often phenomenological[*], we each have our own unique human credentials, nestled within the larger universal human framework. Everyone, as they say, has a story to tell. And if you pay attention, that story just might be helpful or edifying or entertaining to the public at large, or in this case-to a segment of the population I lovingly refer to as lesbians.
I hope this work serves that purpose.
[*] A philosophy or method of inquiry based on the premise that reality consists of objects and events as they are perceived or understood in human consciousness and not of anything independent of human consciousness.
The Contradictory Art of Being Lesbian
Art Does Not Imitate Life Butch, Femme, Androgynous or Femepicene? Hide & Seek Presentation is Everything
The Misnomer The KISS Method, With Perhaps Not So Much Kissing Sour Milk From the Cyber Teat CyberCruising Caveats Meeting Someone Far Away CyberCruising Red Flags & Deal Breakers
Desperation & Expectations 17 Dates Sexercise The Face of Dating Dating Caveats Minding Your Manners After the First Date Dating Red Flags & Deal Breakers
The Applied Art Of Relationships
Understanding the Types: Friends, Lovers,
Partners, Friends with Benefits, Fuckbuddies, Stalkers Orientation, Identity & Behavior The Five C's Relationship Caveats
The Dubious Art of Keeping it Together, When It's Falling Apart
To Mend or Not to Mend Lesbian Bed Death Boredom, Conflicts with In-Laws, Finances, Infidelity
Listen, Sleep On It, Use Humor Caveats for Relationship Angst
The Stolen Art of Sexual Prowess
Safer Sex Good Sex Touching Affection Kissing Foreplay Digital Stimulation Digital Penetration Oral Phallic Penetration Fisting Ass Play Yes, Baby, Tie me Up
Quiz Surveys
Art Does Not Imitate Life Butch, Femme, Androgynous or Femepicene? Hide & Seek Presentation is Everything
Any Lesbian who is currently single knows that it's often a great deal less romantic to be unattached than the media would have us believe. Many of us would love to hang out with the kinds of women we see on the L-Word, yet in the Lesbian Community, this is often not an option. Sophisticated, feminine lesbians are simply not the norm, overall. Most of the actresses who play those roles are in fact, heterosexual. I have frequently been chagrined by this. In all of Hollywood, they could not find a cast of feminine, sophisticated lesbians to play those roles? In this case, it seems that art does not imitate life. It warrants consideration.
Are lesbians primarily less feminine than straight women? I suspect the answer to that is a resounding "Yes."
Accordingly, are masculine lesbians a product of brainwashing-the concept that in romance there must be two opposite roles, one feminine, one masculine? Most likely. Our role models are primarily heterosexual. And since the advent of the Global Village, where the media feeds us information 24/7, the messages we used to receive in whispers from relatives and friends, have become bombardment through a loudspeaker.
Many lesbians in couples refer to their significant other as "wife." I have mixed emotions about this. On the one hand, it does describe our common idea of a female partner; on the other hand, it is a moniker developed exclusively among hetero people. I don't want to fall prey to straight conventions within my lesbian relationship, nor do I want to be militant. Likewise, I am not for "gay marriage" per se; I am for the equal benefits and legal protection of gay people who wish to commit to each other in partnership. To call it "marriage" is again to borrow terminology from straight society.
So my solution is to let the mainstream hetero's have it. Keep the marriage moniker. But give us at least a domestic partnership designation that allows us the same rights and benefits as a straight married couple. That's a win-win. Both my politics and my personal philosophies are moderate-I am a registered Independent and a freethinker-so I guess I will always fall in the middle of some issues
.
All that aside, at the risk of being politically incorrect, I must say I find it disturbing that so many lesbians feel it necessary to mimic men. A lesbian, by definition, doesn't want to be with a man and is a woman who loves women, in the romantic sense. In a very real way, then, masculinity in gay women is a contradiction. It is patently unnecessary to become manly in order to be with another woman. The need to be "manly" then, can sometimes be about gender-confusion, and not about being lesbian. This stance may be offensive to some, but indeed, I could say that I am offended by how easily some lesbians dismiss the beauty and power in themselves by diluting it with masculinity.
Why would a group of people so vehement about avoiding the control and oppression of the other gender, be so anxious to mimic them to such a large degree? When a gay woman chooses to dress in masculine styles, such as what I call the "lesbian costume" of button-down shirts, khaki Dockers, and Doc Marten boots, she is reducing herself to a cliché of what gay women are: women, mimicking men. It is insulting to me, as a gay woman, that many other gay women don't think their appearance is important, and don't embrace their gender as it would seem they naturally would, as women who love women.
This is not to suggest gay women should wear ball gowns or spike heels and mini-skirts. It just means, embrace the femaleness. Why do you think the L-Word is so popular, aside from the fact that it portrays lesbian lives in general? It's because gay women are titillated by the beauty of these women. Attend any L-Word Watch Party and that much will be clear. Then, they run their fingers through their hair, tuck their button-down into their Dockers, slap on that ball cap and go home. Lesbians: if you are so tantalized by feminine, beautiful women, why do spend so little energy presenting yourself that way?
So often I hear lesbians complaining about being stereotyped by the world at large. My suggestion is that if you don't wish to be a stereotype, don't dress and act like one.
In the novels I write, I portray women as feminine or at least as lipstick lesbians, but rarely as dykes or otherwise manly females (which is, intrinsically, an oxymoron). The only time I do portray lesbians as butch or manly is when I'm...sort of...making fun of them. Stereotyping. I know. It's not nice. But as I've already pointed out, Political Correctness is not my strong suit, nor something I aspire to. I think it does more harm than good, when telling the truth is always much better.
In doing this, however, I have been accused of catering to straight men or merely "selling out" somehow, and yet, I find this assessment myopic, contradictory and just plain silly. I love women, because they are women. I love the feminine form. I am attracted to the quintessential qualities that make women FEMALE. If I wanted to be with a man, I would be straight. So this whole outrage based on my supposed treason against Sapphic love, strikes me as absurd.
Why do you suppose that most straight women who experiment with lesbianism, pursue gay women who are manly? It's a comfort zone, that's why. They are not straying too terribly far from being with a man.
The most attractive women, to me, are the ones who are androgynous. I use that term loosely, and colloquially, because the actual definition is way more severe and limiting than the context in which I utilize it here. Androgyny, by its original definition, means ambiguous in gender. Genderless, almost. Like the "Pat" character on the old Saturday Night Live. You can't tell if the person is male or female. The way I mean it, is more like a woman who blends, in a harmonious fashion, the traits of both male and female, to create a balanced person. This means the woman looks like a woman, but can hammer a nail, ride a motorcycle, or be assertive, all without losing her essential womanliness.
To whine about how you're being mashed into a mold created by straight society, and not being allowed to express your natural self, seems a cop-out-a way to avoid embracing the gender to which you are born. It's also an excuse to be lazy. If you don't present yourself in the most positive way, i.e., by wearing decent clothes, a little makeup, and taking care of your body, then you are merely justifying the fact that you don't care about your appearance. And why shouldn't you care? Do you think that men define what is commonly considered "attractive"? Sorry, but that's biology, and it extends to both genders. We are wired to be attracted to certain things; not the least of which is accentuating the best parts of ourselves.
A great fictional character who exemplifies this balanced womanhood would be Xena, the Warrior Princess from television. She was strong, capable, assertive, loving, loyal, always looked fabulous and feminine. Even when she was kicking ass or cutting someone's throat...
I desperately want another term to describe strong, feminine lesbians.
HOMOgenized Female...hmmm.
Fembian. MMM.
Sapphian.
It occurred to me that epicene meant having the characteristics of both genders, blended. So how about Femepicene? (fem-ep-uh-seen).
So women who are Femepicene are those most likely to get my attention. I can't speak for every other gay woman.
The point is, for me, it's often difficult to even be lesbian, never mind the odds of finding a suitable mate. It is somewhat like the odds of my getting a million dollar publishing contract: it's not inconceivable, but it's not something I can rationally place on the altar of my existence.
Finding the right woman can be like a game of Hide & Seek; many factors can affect our ability to find dates or meaningful romantic relationships. Among these are where we live, what our standards are, and what our own lifestyle is like.
Quite often, the biggest factor of all is where we live. Those of us who seek the Femepicene woman, and reside in more rural areas of the country, have to deal with fewer choices. Those who have a more educated background, and a higher income generally have higher standards, and this also decreases the chances of finding a suitable partner. I must play devil's advocate with myself, here, though, because I have it on good authority (testimony from friends all over the nation) that no matter where you live, it's hard to find lesbians who are not in some way damaged emotionally, mentally, or challenged by gender confusion.
That said, if a woman has a college degree and works in a professional field, she naturally seeks another woman of similar experience and education. This is about common ground and not about snobbery. It is an inherent human inclination to seek those we consider our peers-those with whom we can have conversation that includes topics of mutual interest. And those who adhere to this paradigm are usually found in more populated, metropolitan areas, because that's where more culture, higher levels of education, and an overall modern sensibility is usually found. Thus, if you find you are seeking this type of woman, you will inevitably have to move from your small Southern or Mid-Southern town to a larger metropolitan area. Certain interests and tastes are often concentrated in larger cities. But in order to fit in, you will have to make the necessary changes in your personal style and cosmology, or you'll simply find yourself a stranger in a strange land.
If you meet someone, and one of you enjoys going to lectures about String Theory, and the other is addicted to Jerry Springer, this is not a match made in heaven. It is commonly understood that the more education and experience we have in the world, the farther away from our primitive selves we move. This is not a judgment; everyone is on their path. If those paths are intrinsically different, then compatibility is in question. This is exactly why we should seek peers, if we want a longterm relationship that is mutually satisfying.
Another problematic element of matching yourself to the right partner, involves knowing yourself well enough to present yourself honestly. I have met countless women who had a certain concept of themselves, which turned out to be erroneous. This is not necessarily intentional. Some women tell you who they are, but the information is really about who they wish to be. It remains crucial to your success in finding the right partner, that you have an honest view of who you really are. This can only come from deep self-examination-often referred to as "soul-searching." What might be clear to you conceptually, might not manifest itself in reality. You must maintain a heightened awareness of your responses, beliefs and attitudes and constantly seek to match your actions with this knowledge. Anyone can talk-the-talk, but many are patently incapable of walking-the-walk.
In one of my encounters in the past, I found myself addressing just this issue, having been met with the confusion and curiosity of a woman I met online. After having met her in person, I was, over a period of three weeks, reminded that no matter how good the presentation in Cyberspace, the reality could turn out to be something else entirely. I did my best to explain this, after she asked me to go into detail. In an e-mail to her, I wrote:
Normally, I would have responded to this post-haste, but I guess I was a little thrown, and felt that the less said, the better. But I didn't intend to minimize the sharing you just did, and I will respond properly and hope this will be just another thing we come to understand about each other, and move forward.
I liked what I knew of you, online and on the phone, and agreed that you were (as far as I knew) a "pretty cool person." And my standards in that regard are pretty high. This, however, has nothing to do with the presentation of the self. Any person can be someone on the inside, but misrepresent herself on the outside. And I do believe that those two things should be in alignment. If they are not, there's a problem. This is not to say you are out of alignment (LOL), but that maybe you only got out of alignment when you strayed from what was authentically YOU. It can and does get lost in translation sometimes, and I can only hope that you are clear about that alignment in you, whatever that might be. I blame our societal brainwashing for this type of confusion, when it arises; the man and woman/hetero dynamic that is such a major part of our culture.
More specifically, from our many conversations over these 8 months, I got the impression of you as a kindred in regard to what we find attractive in women. I made the assumption that your style matched what you found attractive in another, and that it was much like mine; but I had no way of knowing this for certain, because I had never seen your style, which is one of the reasons it was important to share pictures depicting the way we present ourselves in dress and style in different situations. Your reticence to provide a photo only increased my suspicion.
We didn't have the advantage of understanding from the point of view of having met in person and acquiring this sense of each other with our own eyes. So, as I feared, (and always fear with "virtual" women--those met online first), there were missing pieces to the puzzle of who you were in that sense. So my mind filled in the blanks based on our kindred conversations. How many times did I speak of my bafflement at women who dressed in masculine styles? How many times did I lament the drag shows, or the women who acted like they wanted to be men, or just didn't want to be completely women, because that was a "straight" thing? I made an assumption that you were of like mind on this, because you agreed with my assessments, and I had no other information to go on. And maybe you were of like mind on it, but those ideas were different when applied to yourself, or in the way they came across in person.
Just because we might be attracted to the same types of women, it does not necessarily follow that we are both, ourselves, that type. I discovered, with this revealing email from you, that I completed the picture incorrectly, and that's why I was a little thrown by your "style" paradigm and was reticent to respond in detail.
It has become a cliché for gay women to wear exactly what you said you liked to wear-button-down shirts, Dockers, and Doc Marten boots-(I almost laughed, as it seemed an ironic joke for just a nanosecond, until I realized the stereotype was far more accurate than even I imagined. Those are essentially male clothes, and somehow lesbians adopted it as a way to express their "other" side, or to make a statement that they did not have to be "straight" to be who they are. It was an extreme reaction to a sense of oppression, and was a deliberate attempt to advertise the fact that they were gay. Then they would be able to find each other. It wasn't about them being "true" to themselves, it was about them being able to recognize each other. The fact that it's been perpetuated as a "style" among gay women, is at best, unfortunate. But in these more modern times, that approach is no longer necessary.
To illustrate this in another way, imagine a straight woman meets a man at a restaurant for a date, and he shows up wearing a pink blouse, black slacks, and pumps. Now would it would not be odd if the woman said, "I'm sorry, I can't spend the evening with you dressed like that."
"Why?" he asks.
"Because you're dressed like a girl, and you're a boy."
And if he said, "But this is what I'm comfortable in," would that be an acceptable answer for a straight woman? Not on your life.
I'm comfortable in sleep-pants and a faded, ripped T-Shirt, but I don't wear it out in public. That's not how I wish to present myself to others.
As my friend Justi says, "We have been conditioned to expect and accept less, simply because we're gay." She should know; she speaks to straight women every day in her capacity as a life coach.
So-it was a surprise to me, as I had placed you in another category in reference to what we talked about. (Again, I couldn't have known, because I'd never really "seen" your style). This is not a make-wrong. This is me, misunderstanding your particular style, but now, finally, understanding what that is. And so now I know, and have corrected that idea in my head.
I speak for myself here. I expect you to apply or discard any of this that does or does not ring true for you. Categorically, I am a Freethinker, and somewhat of a rebel, and believe in expressing myself honestly and without shame. But that's where a definition of "honestly", is a handy understanding to have. I don't believe that the opinions of others are necessarily worthy of dismissal out of hand. While there must be a balance between being true to yourself and living most harmoniously in our society, it's not nearly as cut and dried as we have been taught to believe. Self-actualization doesn't have to be an extreme. It's not always either/or. Blending, balance, moderation, a move toward the middle-these are both the actions of a person who is blended, balanced, moderate, and concerned about harmony within their lives and the lives they cross, and also the actions of a person who seeks a healthy personal cosmology, and self-understanding.
But whenever there is a movement away from something not desired, there is a human tendency to move to the opposite end of the spectrum. Yet, this extreme is just as unfortunate as the other. The truth is always to be found somewhere in the middle.
Thus, I feel there is a misconception among many gay women, in that they believe that they are somehow supposed to reject everything that speaks of "straightness"--to include being feminine. I cover this most directly in the first chapter of ISO (which I have attached for your convenience). But suffice, here, to say, I believe that gay women can be 100% gay, and still maintain the same regard for their female gender as they did were that not the case. I also believe that gay women are in a unique position to celebrate all that is beautiful and respectable and strong and sexy and alluring about being a woman. They are not shackled by the need to be so overtly feminine, in order to attract the big-strong-man-to-protect-them dynamic. And they are not yoked with the equally erroneous concept that to be a woman who loves women is to be masculine. It's a question of gender identity and gender confusion, predicated on the often unbalanced portrayals present in media since media began.
It took me a long time to figure out I was a lesbian, too, but it wasn't because I was afraid of it, it was because I didn't really know about it-was too unaware and naive for the thought to have occurred to me in any self-referent way. It was not part of my paradigm. But once I knew, I was happy about it because it explained so much about me that just didn't flow with the mainstream. The thing that most excited me was that it legitimized my attraction to women, and not to men. It was an explanation, finally, why I had no desire to be with a man, to have babies, to be a housewife, to cook and clean for someone who brought home the paycheck, and become merely an appendage for another person. I could choose a path and be my independent self.
I was never drawn to, or aroused by the sight of masculinity. I liked the softness and comfort of women. But I also recognized I didn't like only that, but the underlying strength of a woman, which gave that softness vibrancy; the balance of feminine qualities and the commonly construed "masculine" abilities. I was never more turned on than when I witnessed a completely feminine woman who could use a power tool, or instruct a class about Beowulf, or conduct a corporate meeting; all without falling prey to the castrating mannish persona that often arises out of that situation. I think jeans and a T-shirt are sexy on a curvy, lithe woman who is feminine-the long hair, the makeup, the nice jewelry-the juxtaposition of femaleness, strength, and competence is indeed the nature of my attraction to the softer species.
But to take this womanliness and dress it in the trappings of masculinity, is to me an affront to the very reason I am a woman who only romantically loves other women. Obviously, I am not in the majority on this, (at least not here in the South) and it makes me a bit of a pariah. But I can't pretend to feel otherwise. I am attracted to women who look, act, and dress like women, but without losing sight of their strength and competence.
I can't speak to the comfort zones of other women who feel natural in masculine clothing or in manly mannerisms, or boyish presentations. I have never felt the need to do that to be true to myself. And I am not familiar with the sense that to be a gay woman, I must pull away from presenting myself in at least a partially feminine manner. There's a balance there too, that I have only in the last 10 years begun to understand and implement. I don't want to be overtly femme, nor do I want to be overtly masculine. I want to look like a girl, but not be perceived as weak or helpless or in need of the skills of men. I AM offended if someone labels me a dyke, because there are certain things that give that impression, and that's not my goal, so if it is directed at me, I know I have ignored a vital part of my female identity.
I want anyone I'm romantically involved with to be proud to be seen with me, without fear of those judgments-that frankly, aren't offered if there isn't something going on in that extreme in the spectrum. But that's me. I want to celebrate the fact that I'm female, and am still just as strong as any man in the ways that matter. Why do the straight men get that kind of consideration about caring for our appearance as women, but not gay women? Don't we also deserve at least the same measure of respect? To accentuate the positives in our appearance is to show ourselves as aware of the importance of how we come across to others. It is not a violation of our identity to embrace our gender and care about presenting ourselves in the most positive way. It is a sign of self-respect.
So-that's my cosmology on the Presentation of Ourselves as Gay Women. And no, it has nothing to do with whether or not we can be great friends or love each other for our other wonderful qualities. It would only matter if we wanted to be partners with another person, as the attraction-factor is part of that dynamic, and we are wired biologically to respond to things regardless of cultural conditioning. I am wired in the way I just explained, and there's nothing I can do about it. It would be so much easier for me if my wiring was different, But it's not, and it's what I have to work with; just as you may be wired in a different way, and that's what you have to work with.
Regardless, we must be true to ourselves, and I would never expect you to do anything other than what felt right to you.
This particular friendship, in the popular vernacular, "tanked." We discussed, at length, before, during and after her visit, the option of her starting her life over here, and in the process providing me with a little extra money from having a roommate, which would also help me reach some of my own goals. It might be pertinent to mention here that this was a person who had not worked in years, and obviously made no effort to do so, was living with her ex-girlfriend, who was paying all the bills, and was a felon with several drug-arrests who narrowly missed going to prison-yet the usual stumbling blocks a person like this has earned for herself, and should be humble about, became instead a story about how she was somehow worthy of different rules that others in her situation. I feel justified in assuring my butt was covered in this situation. But she managed to twist the many portions of the agreement we had that was beneficial to her, as a FAVOR to me, repeatedly freaked out and cut off communication when I asked her reasonable questions that she was not prepared to think about, nor address, then accused me of "attacking" her, and generally reframed the whole episode as my fault.
I won't go into any more sordid details, but suffice to say, the information, agreements, discussions and content all got magically twisted in another direction that allowed her to feel good about herself, but had nothing to do with the truth, nor her being self-actualized or honest.
Her response to one of my following e-mails where I tried to answer her confusion, was one of the few in my life that resulted in steam coming out my ears. She did enough spin-doctoring to make any politician proud. I was so angry that I had to completely step away from it for a few days so I wouldn't let my emotional response get the better of me.
I suppose it's one of my pet peeves, and on top of my numerous experiences with other women who seemed to fall into the same category, it was just salt in a rather ugly wound. So my inner-response was off the chain. That's why I did not respond to her email, but rather ignored it and tried to remain civil while I had to pack up the things she had left here and pay to have them shipped to her, which I didn't get reimbursed for promptly, though that was well within her ability. I knew that my response to her twisted rationale would have just cut her off at the knees, and certainly could have made an airtight case worthy of standing up in court. But the only purpose that would serve would be to show her how wrong she was, and that had already proven to be a fruitless effort, and decidedly a waste of my energy. And even if I had managed to maintain composure and be civil, there would be more prodding and questions and we could just never be on the same page again, because we lived in two different realities, and frankly, I felt betrayed.
I simply have no more tolerance left for this type of battle. The opposing army has too many brigades for the percentage of us who are living in the real world and have a grip on our ethical core and ability to be honest. I wouldn't label her "delusional" necessarily, (as I have many others) but I would say that she has a healthy self-deception at play, and delusional is often what that paradigm leads to.
I am aware that these statements run the risk of making me appear arrogant, but my stance happens to be backed up by experts in the psychological community, and my own experience with the frightening numbers of gay women who suffer from some sort of unhealthy mental archetype. And I think it's high time we all stopped excusing reprehensible behavior and steered clear of those who would fly in the face of reason, ethics and mental stability.
I defy anyone, having the data I do, who would reveal my conclusions as baseless or otherwise erroneous.
So, ultimately, any insight or advice I give in these pages is predicated on the assumption that those reading it are capable of recognizing things like truth, ethics and logic, and who wish to maintain healthy, stable relationships in their lives. Those who don't fall into that category are better off just putting this book down, and watching Jerry Springer.
The Misnomer The KISS Method, With Perhaps Not So Much Kissing Sour Milk From the Cyber Teat CyberCruising Caveats Meeting Someone Far Away CyberCruising Red Flags & Deal Breakers
CyberDating is at once a misnomer. There really is no way to "date" in cyberspace, unless you are a disembodied soul who comes across another disembodied soul on the Web.
The dictionary defines dating as, An engagement to go out socially with another person, often out of romantic interest. The operative phrase is "go out"-something many of us avid onliners shrink from. Yes, you have to actually leave the house. You have to peel yourself out of your desk chair or recliner and have a real conversation with someone who is within touching distance.
CyberDating, then, is really CyberCruising. This is not to be confused with CyberFriends, or CyberSex. These relationships are experienced solely via electronic communications and these people never meet each other in the flesh.
I was talking with a friend about how I need to learn to just enjoy the process of dating, since I never was able to do that until the last few years. I was a member of the U-Haul crowd. All my relationships overlapped, and when there was romance, a spark, it just segued into being a couple right away.
I think this is because in a small, often outcast segment of society, it's easy to be ruled by the fear that there will be no one else to love you, if you lose the one who does (or claims to).
In fairness, the gay community has primarily been relegated to bars in order to meet each other. Few can hope to find another like them in the produce section of the supermarket. And since the grand majority of bars are straight bars, there are only a few who cater to same-gender-loving people. The odds go down, exponentially, from there.
The fact that bars are the most common place to meet other gay people, means that there is a tendency for the gay community to develop drinking problems. Add to the ease of access to alcohol, the often inherent guilt or shame of being "different" and you have a recipe for burgeoning AA meetings.
So when we do have a relationship that is nose-diving, we tend to want another woman in place before we cut the ties with the last. But because of this insecurity, we miss out on the joys of slowly getting to know a woman, and just having a good time with that process.
I recently made a pact with myself that I would pursue dating for its own sake and then let nature take its course. I joked that I needed to have 50 First Dates, before I allowed myself to get serious with anyone. It doesn't have to be serious right away. Just because I go out with someone, it doesn't mean I have to see them as longterm partner material...I must remain open...that's the advice I give my friends, anyway. Look at me, giving advice on something I suck at.
Those who can't, TEACH...
The reason I suck at it, is because I've found very few women who meet my criteria. Thus, those 50 First Dates never materialize, because I rarely have the first one.
What happens is, if I am attracted to a woman, and I kiss her, and it's a good kiss, a kiss that lights a fire, then my thoughts become very testosterone-like. I think about what it might be like to make love with her...then I get more excited, and all my lofty ideas and good intentions go out the window in favor of that instant gratification. Everyone wants to feel good, and let's face it: arousal feels good. It's rather like a drug. You just want it to continue and maybe increase.
But what if this girl has a great personality, is attractive, and I am sparkin' on her, and what if she's also a good kisser, whose lips match mine, and then I keep it simple and don't go all the way? Then I'm investing in her.
And what if, when we do make a commitment, and make love, I hate it? What if she's bad in bed? Then what? (or God Forefend, she feels that I am bad in bed)-I'm not.
Finding the right mate is so much like finding the right job...we really are interviewing everyone we date. Will we get along? Are we of like mind? Will the environment be to my liking? Will this make me feel safe and secure? Is there financial trouble? Will there be a chance of advancement? Are there any guarantees of any sort? Will I be passed over later, dumped, set aside for someone younger, more vibrant?
I wish those high-horsers would just get over themselves and realize that it's not shallow to be prudent, not superficial to want what we want, and not in the least insensitive to admit when something is just not a happenin' thing. Yet I realize there are ways to do that with the fewest casualties.
Ultimately, though, I cannot be responsible for everyone else's feelings. I tend to do that, and then I just get all stressed out worrying about how everyone else is feeling, to the exclusion of how I'm feeling. Ostensibly, we are all adults, and should be able to handle the ups and downs of life and romance. So it's best to let everyone deal with her own individual crap.
In our discussion, my friend said, "Well, I think if I could just get some good sex-"
But that argument doesn't wash for me, if I'm being honest, because I know that really good sex means MEANINGFUL, going-somewhere sex. (Not that hot, monkey sex isn't enjoyable). But meaningful sex means a connection with someone. The proverbial SPARK.
Now, I have learned how to do the casual sex thing-as long as it was SAFE SEX, and as long as I was at least attracted to the woman. But is that really who I am? Or is it who I could have been, if I'd had a normal dating life all these years? Is it too late for the old girl to change? Do I want to be a casual sex person? Not particularly. But ultimately, we all have our needs to fill, and if I can have an enjoyable, uncomplicated sexual encounter that's safe, I'll do it if I'm attracted to her. Problem is, the enjoyable and uncomplicated only gets judged after the fact, and the safe has to be taken care of beforehand-with paperwork proving our clean STD status. Some women are actually offended when you ask them about their status. They take it as a personal affront, not realizing that another person has no way of knowing, without that empirical data, the degree of her veracity. People lie. Mostly because they have needs to fill too, and those needs can override both their good sense and their moral responsibility.
Those who can, DO...
As I continue my journey through cyberspace and online dating, I alternately become buoyed and then sink to the bottom. What I've found, overall, is that the women I'm attracted to are not attracted to me, and the ones who are attracted to me, I'm not attracted to.
Is online dating all that different from real time dating, then? Would I be on the same Dilemma Horns if this were happening by meeting a woman in a real-time restaurant, cookout, coffee shop or bar? Would I still come across constant liars, continual frustration, devious misinformation? I'm afraid the answer to that one seems to be "yes." People are people. Even if you meet them initially in person, there are still things to be uncovered that cannot be revealed through one meeting. Your chances are much better if the getting-to-know-you phase is predicated on real-time dating, as the anonymity of the Internet can often keep these details hidden. So if you use the Internet for making first contact, you should move toward an in-persona meeting as soon as possible.
Then there's the absurd obsession with sucking on the Cyber-Teat...Do I have new mail? Is it someone I want to hear from? Is it someone I wish would go away? It's kind of a Christmas-morning feeling when I hear that Tom Hanks sound bite, "You've got mail" from the movie of the same name (one of my favorites; see? I am a romantic at heart). Anyway, when I hear that, I know an email just got dropped in my Outlook inbox. It's really hard to ignore. And if I'm in another part of the house, I tend to hurry into my office to check it out. Makes me feel like a silly teenager.
There are always a few ladies I am corresponding with whom I feel might be worth getting to know... but how long before we discover that the online correspondence needs to move into real-time, or that the geological distance between us is an insurmountable obstacle? Or how long before they say or do something that suggests my investment of time in them has been wasted? Like, "Oh, I decided to stop taking my medication. I haven't had an episode in months!"
Since I don't go to a standard office to work, I don't meet people there. Since religion is not for me, I can't meet anyone at a church; I'm over the bar scene. And college? I've been there, done that-eight years worth. Because I'm also in a place that lacks the social life and dating choices I crave, what is left for me? Trysts in dark corners? Repeated discoveries of the unsavory kind? Lowering my standards to the point where I can't look at myself in the mirror each morning? Investing myself in someone who is ultimately ill-equipped for a healthy relationship?
Most of us want a lifemate, but don't want the quagmire that goes with it. We want the companionship and the social life, but not the dodging of landmines that ensue...we want the benefits without the effort. Unrealistic of us, isn't it? Yet we still hope, don't we? Even amid the usual pitfalls of just getting involved with someone new, we hope, we pursue...we ride the emotional roller coaster, swallow the fear of contracting a disease because no matter what the test results say, you can never be sure; dread the inevitable domestic squabbles and power-plays, the dissatisfaction and disillusionment when you find out that person who appears to be so colorful and so well-adjusted, is just very good at lying to themselves, or to you.
Sometimes I think that if I placed an ad that had a picture of a woman with one eye in the middle of her forehead and missing teeth, whose introduction began, "Hello, my name is Drucilla Snood, and I am unique..." -that I'd have more luck. All the Cyclops-lovers would come streaming out of the ether.
Periodically, I just want to have that sexual and social instinct in me surgically removed, so that I won't have to worry about it anymore. Maybe I should just sell everything and go to an ashram in Tibet.
I hear that Monks are very well adjusted.
Extreme solutions to extreme situations aside, here are some things I've noticed in perusing personal ads-things that I consider Red Flags Or Deal Breakers.
A profile that is void of any information. No stats, no photo, no text, nothing filled out, accompanied by the invitation, "Contact me if you're interested." My response: "In WHAT, for bloody sake?" How could I possibly make an assessment on whether or not I'm interested, when there is NO information about her? Sometimes she might have only a clear or unclear photo, but this is a person who obviously thinks that her picture is all that's needed. No one has a picture THAT good.
A profile self-descriptive text that mentions any of the following:
I don't know what to say about myself. (If you are not self-actualized enough to know what to say about yourself, what could you possibly have to say to me? It's like that job interview: if you can't tell me what you have to offer, who you are, then why would I hire you? And more to the point, why do we do this for a job with a company, but not for a position as "potential partner"?)
I'm just me. (This means absolutely nothing. Does it conjure a picture of something? An idea of who this person is? Not even close. The whole point is to discover details about a person for the sake of common ground and maybe beginning some type of meaningful relationship. This sparse, vapid and meaningless phrase is merely a cop-out and another indication that this person has no concept of how to communicate her own identity).
I love to laugh. (Not me, Ladies, I'm quite dismal in my demeanor and laughter really gets on my last gay nerve. Holy crap. Who doesn't like to laugh? Give me something I can use. Tell me WHAT makes you laugh, and why. Again, very similar to a job interview or a resume for that job, vagueness is counter-productive).
I am down-to-earth. (A woman who has a lovely home and grows her own herb and vegetable garden for cooking gourmet meals could be described as "down to earth." A person who lives in a tent in the woods and loves to birth baby spiders in her hair could, too. See? If everyone says that, and it's a catch-phrase, how does it in any way make a person stand out? Here's a clue: it DOESN'T).
Yo just chillin' with my peeps. (Obviously an urban/ethnic mentality, but more importantly, a person who has not yet evolved into an adult).
The following profile blurb shows a lack of depth, and a problem with communication, self-actualization, or intelligence. Here you will find horrid spelling, sentence fragments, run-on sentences and sentences that have absolutely no punctuation...
Me well what can I say I am a outgoing fun party girl. I like to do just about anything. I love outdoors, the clubs, on my porch getting f*cked up. I am down for whatever. I am open mined and not to shy. Theirs lots more but you would just half to get to know me. I would like some one who can start a conversion who is open mined likes trying new things i do not want a shy person I want someone who will take control sometimes someone with a nottie side no borning person.
She likes to get "fucked up," is "open mined" and wants you to start the "conversion."...there are so many errors and ignorance in this profile, that only someone with that degree of ignorance would be interested-again, she'll only find a peer. And maybe that's best. But this profile indicates an obvious lack of education, inability to pay attention, apathy, and/or generalized brain dysfunction.
More Red Flags and Deal Breakers can be found in the following:
A profile that says "lives with parents" when she is beyond the age of 25. Could be extenuating circumstances, here, like she returned home to care for an ill parent, or to go to school to advance herself while her mother babysat the kid, but more often than not, this means she never grew up enough to be away from mommy, or else she is a lazy, unmotivated freeloader with little personal integrity.
She is 25 and has children who "don't live with" her. While I understand that there are exceptions to every rule, I have to go with the majority on this one. Something is amiss when a young woman has children that are for some reason not living with her. It's not usually because she's being persecuted, or lost both her arms in a tragic excursion with the Peace Corp. It's usually because she is not mature or responsible enough to care for her own kids. Does the phrase "unfit mother" ring any bells?
A profile that says she is IN a relationship, but is "looking." Big no-no. Why would you want to go out with a woman who is currently cheating on her Significant Other? If she'll do it WITH you, she'll do it TO you. No matter when you might discover this information, ditch her immediately. Date over. No discussion. See Ya. You do not want to be the "other woman." Not only would doing so reveal your dismal self-concept, but you will be giving her permission to continue being that person. Sometimes the individual these women are in relationships with are men, too. Some men who find out about this indiscretion, will hunt you down and put a bullet in your head. Not wise. Not wise at all. Either way, it never turns out well, and you'll begin with the biggest trust issue in the world.
A photo in her profile that reveals intimate areas of the anatomy, or is sexually suggestive. This screams a general disrespect for self and an erroneous idea that self-worth is somehow tied to anatomical aesthetics and/or sexual prowess, which is usually to the exclusion of mental, emotional and spiritual development. Who would want someone that loose on their arm?
A profile photo that is at best unflattering and at most worthy of inclusion in Ripley's Believe it Or Not. It just defies logic how anyone can think that some pictures are the ones to choose when trying to make a good impression
Aside from how scary she is…are those prison bars behind her?
Or those photos reminiscent of that scene in Deliverance (no, not that one, this one)
Or one that lists her body type as "a few extra pounds" when that's an obvious understatement (not to mention delusional). When you know your entire body weight is equal to the weight of her right breast, it's time to move on.
Or the ones who are just plain scary. A beard? For real? You are a real bearded lady? Oh, let me gas up the car, I have to meet you right away! (Newsflash: the guitar doesn't make up for it. If you imagine that crooning me a song will make me forget that I am not attracted to hairy women, you are sadly mistaken. And about the beard: get some therapy or get the operation, for chrissakes).
Anyone seeking a hot date with a garden gnome?
This is not even to mention the ones who advertise themselves as if headlining at a brothel; who suggest that all the ills of your world can be cured with one visit to her magic pussy. I will spare you the photo of that one...
One of these days, I'm going to place an ad
like this, and see if I get any responses: 
I'm not down to earth, but am unstable, flighty and undependable. I hate the beach and fresh air of any kind. Cuddling is abhorrent to me, as is cooking, exercise, healthy food and spending time with most people. I prefer to be alone. I am looking for a woman who will support me financially, give me sex whenever I want and be okay with the poontang I bring home. I will need my own room. I worship Satan, believe in human sacrifice, chew aluminum foil, and have several pet scorpions.
With all of the aforementioned angst in mind, I offer the best advice I can give, having often learned the hard way.
During the initial contact, the communication that follows, and on the first date with anyone, there are certain considerations and precautions that should be heeded for the success and safety of the date.
Ideally, you might meet this person in a social situation while other mutual friends are present, but with CyberCruising, you meet them online, so some altered rules apply.
Spend some time perfecting your profile. I am constantly updating mine. I've tried many different approaches and tones, and have learned that unique but humorous is a good way to go. One of my profiles was so intense that it actually intimidated women. That approach was all wrong and created an uncomfortable dynamic when we met in person because it made her fearful that she wouldn't measure up to my perceived standards. That wasn't the impression I wanted to give. I just wanted to eliminate all the time wasters, like the women I knew for sure I didn't want to meet. I have since lightened up on it with more focus toward dating instead of searching for a soulmate. At this writing, I am still testing that one.
There are few things more likely to prevent you from getting a date than a bad profile. (I'm speaking about those who are relatively stable, well-adjusted people, not the certifiably insane, or emotionally crippled). As illustrated earlier, you want to present yourself in a good light without seeming artificial or scary. A profile is not the place to mention the medications you're on, or the severe health conditions you suffer from. This is done on a need-to-know basis. If you're only meeting for coffee, you don't need to know the intimate details until after you decide whether or not you have actual chemistry. If you meet in person and like each other, those details will come up naturally and decisions can be made at that point according to who you are as a whole.
Also avoid tones of anger, depression, desperation and cruelty in your profile. No one worth having will be attracted to any of that. Be honest, humorous, and mention positive things about yourself and your life.
Always provide photos. Some women balk at posting a picture, but without one, you're guaranteed to be overlooked more often than not. That's because humans are visual and they need to know if they are attracted to you physically, before investigating the other aspects of who you are. Otherwise, there's no point. (Cybercruising isn't about finding friends, even though many claim this is their goal. What they REALLY mean when they say they are seeking friends, is that they don't want to move too fast. Why not just say that, rather than frame it in some disingenuous manner?) As long as you're not posting nude photos, you have no worries about them being misused. I mean, who would care? Why would anyone take your pleasant little mug shot and destroy your life? How could that happen, anyway?
The arguments against posting a photo are usually lame:
"I'm a private person." (Does she go to work with a bag over her head, then? How does a photo of herself invade her privacy?)
"I want to be loved for who I am on the inside." (either she has a horn growing out of her forehead, was burned in a Meth-lab accident, or she weighs 400 pounds. If you are aroused by disfigurement or fat, then go for it).
"I don't have any photos on this computer." (So, is this a computer at the library? Is it at work? That means she doesn't have a computer at home, either because she's poor, or she's not a computer person. Either way, she should not be finding dates on the computer if she's not willing to commit to using one).
"I don't have a camera." (who doesn't have a camera these days? Again, if you want to play on the Internet field, some equipment will apply. If money's an issue, a cheap digital camera can be had for $30. If she can't spare it, she shouldn't be offering herself up as a potential partner, because she has nothing-at least financially-to bring to the table. Additionally, everyone knows someone who has a camera. Cameras are common on cell phones these days too. If she doesn't have a friend with a camera and she doesn't have a cell phone, again, what the hell is she on the Internet for?).
"All my photos burned in the house fire." Odds are, this is a blatant lie designed to gain sympathy while avoiding the exchange of photos.
The only excuse I've ever heard for not providing a photo that had any merit is when a woman is not "out" at work or to her kids, and is afraid of being outed and/or losing her job or custody of her children to an ex-husband. But even that one is flimsy. If you're not proud of who you are, and if you demonstrate this to your children, you can't expect to build a good life for yourself, nor raise kids who don't commit hate-crimes. I know that there are special circumstances with this one, but more often than not, it's still another reason to avoid a relationship with this person. If she doesn't want to be outed, when will you ever feel like she's your partner?
So, in summary, the lack of a photo elicits immediate suspicion as it will appear that you have something to hide.
When you do upload a photo, make sure it's a clear, well-lit, close-up face shot as your primary one, and also include others that show you in varying situations, such as with friends. Then you can be seen as the social person you are, who has possession of some social skills to the extent that others want to be seen with you.
Also include a full length photo of yourself. Some women can have a slender face and shoulders, but be shaped like the Michelin Man below. It's better to get that out at the upstart, because it's not likely she won't notice when you lumber in for your first coffee-date.
There does seem to be some prevalence of delusion here. It's as if some women think that you will see only what they want you to see when you meet in person; that you will not notice that they are not as they presented themselves online. If you're going to meet someone in person, but still have 100 more pounds before you reach your healthy weight, it's not likely you will lose it before next weekend.
Contrarily, women who say that they don't care what you look like are either lying, or so desperate that they can work up an attraction or attachment to anyone who pays them any attention; otherwise, they are more evolved than 99% of the world. I seriously doubt the evolved explanation, simply because if they were that advanced, they would not be surfing the Internet for love, but would instead be in that ashram in Tibet, on their way to being an Ascended Master.
We're human, we're imperfect, we're guided by brain chemicals and energies, and there's no legitimate reason to deny it. Just post a picture and be who you are. Everyone is attracted to different things. If the right person sees it, you will be starting from a position of honesty and connection, and not from some mythical Higher Plane.
Don't include pictures of your dog, or the sunset you saw last year on the beach. No one is looking for a dog or a sunset to go out with. I've seen profiles that even omitted a picture of the person who placed the ad, but included photos of their pets, their art, their vacations, or even their MOM. That might give someone a clue how you'll look in 30 years, but it doesn't give insight to what you look like now. Not a stupendous illustration of comprehension. None of these things have squat to do with whether or not another woman is drawn to you.
Don't post a picture of yourself from 10 or 20 years ago. Always exchange recent photos. They serve many purposes as I've already mentioned. Ask her when the photos were taken. If she sends you a nude photo of herself, that's a red flag. If she'll send one to you, she'll send one to anyone else, and that suggests she is capricious about her morals, and free with her affections.
As above, old photos are not a representation of who you are or what you really look like. I have experienced and heard of many instances where a woman posts an attractive picture of herself, only to find that the cute, petite blond with dancing eyes and a million dollar smile, had evolved into a ruddy, obese, starkly gray visage with squinty eyes, leather skin, and a million wrinkles.
Don't use stupid, offensive or unintelligible usernames in your ad. They are a put off. If your name is LabiaLicker or TasteMEnow, you're only going to draw those with an overactive sexual appetite. If that's what you're after, fine, but the purpose of this book is to help you find a quality person who has possibilities for the long haul not the U-Haul.
Be prepared to describe who you are in your profile. If you want someone to be interested, give them something to be interested in. Don't give the impression that you avert your eyes and mumble toward the floor when asked to talk about yourself. Being able to describe yourself is not about vanity, it's about self-actualization and communication skills. If you have nothing better to say than you're down to earth, love your dog, love walks on the beach, and like to laugh-then perhaps you should consider enriching your life a bit. These are the most overused and meaningless phrases ever. You'll wind up alone on the earth, petting your dog, and thinking about how great it would be to walk on the beach or laugh.
Always pay attention to spelling, construction and punctuation. Text messaging shorthand, misspelled words, run-on sentences, sentence fragments...all these paint a picture of who you are. And it's an ugly picture. If she made it out of high school without these skills, it means that personal evolution is not on her docket. And you don't want to be with someone who can't grow. Either she doesn't care how she presents herself (which means you could never be proud to be with her in public), or she is uneducated, oblivious and shallow.
And please, whatever you do, don't state in your profile that you're tired of being hurt. If you're tired of being hurt, that implies that it happens a lot and that makes you a chump and a victim. Not sexy.
Watch out for Overt Flirting and Sex Talk. When you begin to correspond via email or IM with a potential date, be wary of women who want to talk about sex frequently, or continue to flirt overtly with you, use terms of endearment, and otherwise suggest that the two of you are already ensconced in the sexual milieu.
If you barely know anything beyond the vital stats of this person, and she is already engaged in amorous banter with you, she is not usually sincerely interested in getting to know you on any real level. Consider the possibility that sexual banter, especially before you've met a woman in person, is simply inappropriate, and to use the tired excuse, "Oh, I'm just a flirt. It doesn't mean anything," is a cop out. I can say this knowing that I have been guilty of the behavior. What I have discovered, and had to admit to myself, is that it is counterproductive, if what you seek is something lasting and authentic and multi-dimensional. You don't want to set up sexual expectations before you've even laid eyes on each other.
Don't give out your home address or many personal details. If this person turns out to be a nutjob, you certainly don't want them to be able to stalk you. It is not dishonest to withhold certain information at the beginning. It's for your own protection.
Don't Act Like a Stalker & Don't Tolerate Stalking or Obsessive Behavior. If you contact someone online and they say no thanks or otherwise refuse you, don't contact them again in an effort to convince them of their misjudgment. Move on. Likewise, if someone won't take no for an answer, give them no answer at all. Ignore them.
Sassyasskitty on Plentyoffish.com, suggests another response:
"I rather prefer using the following method: OMG!!!! WOW!!!! You are perfect, I mean perfect!!!! When can we meet so we can have sex, get pregnant, and then get married, and live happily ever after until I decide I don't want you, just your check??? Can I call you?? Where do you live??? Muah!!!! Cant' wait to hear from you again!!!!!
Love you hunnybunny cuppycakes!!!!"
Hysterical. Really. And it can be effective in scaring them more than they just scared you. But there's always a chance that they are so delusional that they don't understand the fine art of sarcasm. Obsessive personality types feed off the interaction, and it doesn't have to be positive interaction either. Ignoring them is the wisest thing you can do.
Understand that some sites use bait profiles. Women are hired to place ads and encourage membership. I have this directly from a woman who was paid to do this. After you pay to join, that woman you joined for suddenly disappears. Remember, if a profile seems too good to be true, it probably is.
If you come across a profile for a woman who's got six-pack abs, flowing blond hair, drives a Porsche, is a doctor or lawyer or CEO, makes huge amounts of money, has a vacation home in Boca Raton, and has the perfect profile-Beware. If a woman is that perfect, she has no problem finding a date or a girlfriend. She might have trouble finding honest ones, but the Internet is generally not a paragon of virtue where that's concerned. If she wanted to get to know someone who will love her for her, and not her prestige or money, then the last thing she'd do is tell you how much of both she has.
Another pertinent point: if she is that accomplished, and is online, she can afford to join and doesn't have to ask you to do it in order to talk to her.
Some legitimate reasons for someone like that to be online is if she lives in a remote area with little or no social life that interests her, or she has recently moved and is beginning the process of establishing her social life. But you have to balance that with her other trappings. I don't have an expensive car, or six pack abs, and I'm not a CEO...that's part and parcel of living within my means, and within the area I reside, and of being real about who I am. If you see an ad that claims all that and she is in a large city, then shopping online for a date is probably something she has to do for other reasons. These are probably not reasons you want to rub elbows with.
Don't assume someone is necessarily sold on you. When you begin email communication with someone, keep it casual, ask questions, and answer the ones you're asked. Pay attention to the content and respond to it fully. This shows that you are attentive and have conversational skills, even if it is only in writing at this point.
Once, I winked at a woman whose profile seemed interesting, if quirky. I then forgot all about it and something like a week or two later, I received a mail from her. Within the first paragraph, I knew that it was the kind of quirky that fills state hospitals.
There was no reference anywhere in the mail about who she was. This is where the wise thing would be to simply ignore the mail, but I am afflicted with a need to understand things--human nature especially--and I tend to pursue situations just to find out what it's all about. (Some humans are like lab specimens to me. I can't help myself. I call it "Stick Buggin'" because it's like worrying an insect with a stick, just to see what reaction I'll get). I replied by telling her I was at a disadvantage and she needed to identify herself and the site she was responding from.
She wrote back and mentioned something about my having winked at her, but I still didn't know where, so I couldn't look at her profile to figure it out. I finally got the site out of her and it took another mail to get her username. That's when I recalled who she was, finally. Not at all who I thought.
She spoke in flowery, nebulous language that had me frowning and saying, "What the hell?" Nothing she said made any sense. Her sentences were fragmented, full of misspellings and typos and seemed to meander in and out of some dream world. It was like she had some flesh-eating bacteria in her brain.
Before I could think of how to respond, like in the next hour, she wrote to me again with more of the same. I wrote her back and said that I appreciated her interest, but that I was dating someone seriously, and wished her luck. She continued to write to me as if this message meant nothing to her. She said,
...thinking about this you said today, it wasn't that long ago, maybe your having second thoughts, if you have third we can talk...
What happened to "no means no?" I was trying to be polite, but she obviously thought I would be sucked in my her charm. She had Googled me and found my author site and read a lot of it, and I guess that made her feel like she knew me. The mail continued to get more weird:
Ok so there is a reason she called me a bug, or is it because there is no-one else other than these that respond with meows and barks...
I never called her a bug, and I'm not sure what she meant.
I plant spinach in the fall and it grows through the winter for the deer, they love it, so good for them. The deer are fighting off cjd after all, over.
I didn't know what CJD was, so of course, was forced to Google it. Seems it's Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease--similar to Mad Cow...(I suspected SHE was the one who had Mad Cow, not the deer)…and "Over"? Does she think she's on a short wave radio?
To the point I grew so brave as to write you again, for some reason, there was another reason you were on cupid. Was trivial to me even the day I read it, or heard it don't remember which.
So not only is she coy, but she hears voices?
For some reason you seemed like Rita Mae Brown, but after reading things you wrote, there is a slight difference, and why would I think you were RMB still a puzzle. For some reason 'style' haunts me, like an annoying itch. Something about people might be taking advantage of lesbians online, or even pretending to be lesbian only to get involved with these women just to take them for what they are worth. So that would make you cupids top cop.
It's like a riddle, now. How did we go from Rita Mae Brown to online lesbians and me being Cupid's top cop?
Your book 'As you were' I do intend to read, as it haunts me too, the teaser wrote on your website is da ja vue for me. My last relationship lived, lives in Colorado...
Well in order to READ that novel, she'd have to BUY it. Unless she thinks she can read it via telepathic means. And her last relationship lived, even though she tried to KILL HER? Oops.
...for reasons not so different than those in your book I am here and she is there. Just damn weird. Do you know Lucy?
First, there are no "reasons" presented in the blurb for As You Were. And oh yeah, considering the setting of my novel was Colorado, I of course lived there, and of course, could have run into "Lucy."
Apple is another story, one you might be interested in. She wanted to be selfless, but only found trials and me in her trails to selflessness. We were the three capricorns she would say, like a magic emblem we had power together. To me all this is none-sense, astrology stuff. She lived in Florida and hung around the streets of Daytona with her friends, as some of those friends became very well known a few years later. 2001.
This last paragraph was the final straw, as I discovered by discussing it with my best friend, who astutely pointed out that it was an obvious reference to Eileen Wuornos, the serial killer who was executed a few years ago. (My friend was researching female serial killers for a book at the time). I decided to just ignore her and hope she went away. Although, I fully expect her to buy this book and read it, and then be highly pissed at me for casting her in such a blazingly negative light. Perhaps she's harmless, but she presents herself as mentally disturbed.
To be sure, crazy or disturbed people don't know they are crazy or disturbed. Dealing with them rationally is about as effective as performing an appendectomy on yourself with a spoon. The best advise (which I sometimes don't take due to my curiosity affliction) is ignoring them, as any form of engagement, even the rebuffing kind, is cause for them to continue contacting you. They want your response no matter what it is. So if you ignore them, they will usually slink off and bother someone else.
She continued to write to me, even though she got no response from me for nine solid months. This experience convinced me to change my usernames again on all dating sites to something other than my real name, so that the clever ones couldn't Google me and read my site. I need to keep my professional life separate until I know someone enough to make that judgment call. I knew better when I did it, but I had marketing in mind as well. Writers are always looking for new readers. But it's not worth it if they intend to burn your book and make you eat the ashes while you're chained in their basement...
I was beginning to have nightmares about Kathy Bates breaking my ankles, like she did to the unfortunate author in the movie, Misery.
Continuing with my advice to CyberCruisers, then:
After you have exchanged enough email to gain rapport, (and she doesn't seem like a lunatic who makes vague references to serial killers she hung out with, or how much she likes your ankles), try to do instant messaging with her. This way you can see how she communicates in real time, as it can mimic a real conversation. You can also see if she knows how to spell, or even type, and how cohesive her communication is.
I once agreed to IM with a woman, and it took her so long to type a sentence, I thought I would claw my own eyes out. I got up, made a sandwich and came back into my office to sit down, and she was still not done with her sentence. I simply don't have the patience, nor the time for that; I'm not a Special Ed Teacher.
After IMing, if you're still interested, ask if you can talk to her on the phone.
When you do plan a phone call, be sure to jot down some ideas about what you want to say to her and questions you still want to ask her. This helps avoid all that awkward silence. Rapport on the phone is often a precursor to rapport in person. If you can't quite understand what she's saying, or she's rubbing you the wrong way in the phone call, it's not likely that will be different in person.
If she doesn't want to talk on the phone, or won't provide a photo, cease contact. The only reason someone will refuse these things is if they are not who they say they are, or have no intention of getting to know you on any serious level. As with the photo-issue, if she won't give you her phone number, there's going to be a reason, and again, it won't be because of privacy. Phone numbers can be found with little effort. Even if they are unlisted; though you might have to pay to get those.
You have to ask yourself--or better yet, ask HER--why she doesn't want to do that. There is another list of excuses much like the no-photo excuses which are common here. The bottom line is, if she doesn't want to give you her phone number, it's probably because she's afraid her husband or girlfriend would overhear. Or maybe because she doesn't have a phone and is using the Internet at another location. Either way this is again an indication that something is fishy, or otherwise ill-advised.
Some onliners will lure you in only for the purpose of having cybersex, and then you will never hear from them again. Don't flatter yourself. She doesn't want to have cybersex because you're all that, she just needs someone else to type lewd things so she can have her hands free to masturbate, with the help of some fantasy-person in her head. Do yourself a favor; if she doesn't want to send you a photo, won't give you a phone number, and all she wants to talk about is sex, she has nothing of value to offer you. Cease contact.
This process of online communication should not be prolonged, either, as the point is a real relationship in real time. A funny thing happens when you overdevelop an exclusively online relationship. The human brain fills in the missing parts, and almost always, those parts will not match the actual person when you meet her. This is extremely awkward and almost certainly doomed to die a quick death. Rarely will anyone seem like the same person you've been talking to online, if you've allowed that form of communication to continue very long.
One successful technique is to email her a little survey. They're fun and revealing and they avoid meaningless banter about insignificant things.
Webcams are for more than cybersex. A webcam can be used to see a woman in real time before you meet her. It's as close as you'll come to feeling like you're actually in the room with her, before actually being in the room with her. You must make it clear, however, that you are not using the webcam as a means to have cybersex. Watching someone on video is helpful in allowing us to see things like body language, appearance, and mannerisms. You can also find out how comfortable they are with themselves. Often, there is also a glimpse of what their environment looks like. If you see that things look clean and organized, that tells you something, just like if you see stacks of trash and cobwebs, or a cat hanging from the drapery cord…by its neck.
I once went to meet a woman I had been chatting with online and on the phone, and was so repulsed by her house, that there was no way I could ever be involved with her, no matter how attractive she was otherwise. A woman's home is a reflection of who she is, and what's in her head. I firmly believe that. When there are stacks of stuff everywhere, and inch of dust, a huge dog that jumps on everything, including you, and insects meandering around without fear, you'd better be ready to bid her adieu in a swift fashion.
If all goes smoothly with the online and phone communications, however, and you still feel there might be something there worth pursuing, set up a time and place to meet in person.
CyberSparks can be meaningful, but they are based on a two dimensional idea, and mean nothing unless the sparks are there in person.
"I've met over twenty-five women online. None of them were bad experiences, with the exception of one or two," said Buffie T. of Fulton, Mississippi. "and I never really got to know those particular girls anyway. I never had any actual dealings with them. The last one I met online is now my partner. We've been together for seven months, and we are just as in love as if it were the first day we met."
One woman I met online and spent some time getting to know, was an impressive specimen, and I had high hopes that we had real possibilities. I drove a substantial distance to meet her, and was shocked and disappointed that I just had no spark with her. She also wasn't as attractive as her photos, for whatever reason. I was impressed by her personality and her intelligence and her view of life. But I simply didn't have a spark. Spark was important because that was too far to drive for just a date. She handled my confession with grace and dignity and I saw that she was emotionally mature and a woman of substance. This made me even more disappointed. Who wouldn't want that kind of woman as a partner? These things can be so inexplicable.
At any rate, I got a nice weekend getaway out of it, and some great company. There are those who will argue that I gave up too soon, but I firmly believe that if you don't have that spark at the beginning, you won't have it later. By "spark" I don't necessarily mean love at first sight, or weak in the knees, or overwhelming passion that incites you to throw her down and hump her. I mean that you are drawn to her; you can recognize that you are interested in spending time with her, getting to know her, and have a sense that this interest is romantic. The stronger the spark, the better, but it doesn't always have to be overwhelming.
The first time I fell in love, for instance, it took two weeks, and it hit me like a sack of sand. That happened after I spent time with the woman working on a creative project, and we were both sparkin' on the project itself, and then the sparks turned naturally toward each other. We had a chance to share something together and get to know one another through long discussions as well. I was even having sex with this woman BEFORE I fell in love with her. So sparks are crucial. There are always exceptions to every rule, of course, but primarily, I believe this to be set in stone.
According to my surveys, 68% say they agree that that spark is vital before pursuing a relationship.
In the case of online interest in a woman who lives a long distance away, it's always an option to meet her at a halfway point for coffee. This keeps you both in neutral territory.
If you do decide to make the whole trip yourself, it is never a good idea to buy a plane ticket to go visit her. This leaves you without options. If things go awry, a cab might not be immediately available. Drive yourself in your own car or rent one.
Also, try not to stay in her home on the first visit. Insist on a hotel. If you can't afford this, then you aren't able to date this way. If your type of gal isn't indigenous to your area, take a friend along, or simply consider relocating.
Recently a friend of mine bought a plane ticket to meet a woman she had been talking to online for a few weeks. Before the day of her trip arrived, however, she met someone special locally. When she informed the Internet woman of this and asked if she still wanted to meet, the woman fell slowly but surely into the depths of emotional disorder. She revealed herself as controlling, demanding, selfish and irrational. The last message included wishing a venereal disease on my friend. So, it was a $200 lesson, as the ticket was non-refundable.
If you do decide it might be worth it to meet someone far away, Let a friend or family member know where you will be and who you will be with. Just in case you go to a date and then disappear in a situation that involves duct tape and a tarp.
Never make promises about how you feel or will feel about a woman before you've actually met her. This is a natural extension or precursor to allowing your conversations to move into sex-talk. There's a time and a place for discussions about sex, and it's not before you meet each other. Later, you can discuss it in the context of previous relationships, like and dislikes, if both of you suspect it might be going there for the two of you. But talking about it early-on can be misleading.
If you have been mercilessly flirting with her online and on the phone, and then you meet and find you are not attracted to her, she might take that as a personal affront-that you were leading her on. Things can get nasty really fast.
Hedging your bets. Maybe you meet a woman online, you talk to her for a long time, and you just have this funny feeling that she might be the one for you...
Before you commit to meeting her on her turf, you can always do a background check on her. There are many online sites that you can pay a small fee to do this, and although it may seem like too much, it's no more than you would pay to go out on a date, and it could very well help you dodge a bullet. If you use the Internet frequently to find dates, you might consider joining one-time fee services that allow you to check on anyone at any time. But at the very least, verify via your own phone calls, the things this woman tells you about her job, who she knows, and so on. Look up her place of employment, to see if it exists. Call her place of employment and ask if she's there. Ask her the same question in a different way at different times and see if you get the same answer. Watch for those red flags.
I know it seems like the actions of a private investigator to do these things; it might even seem a bit hardcore; but it's no less important than doing it if you were going to hire her to work for you. You are basically considering this person as a potential date and maybe even a potential mate. Whether date or mate, you don't want to find yourself in a situation that might cause you harm. The world is full of crazy, dangerous people. You mustn't place yourself in harm's way. It's all a judgment call, but if you have a history of poor judgment where romance is concerned, all the more reason to be extra cautious. The old caveat "better safe than sorry" applies here.
If it all checks out, don't forget to provide detailed information to that trusted friend. Better yet, ask the woman you're going to visit if she will email this info to your friend directly. This can be a good test of character and honesty-but even this is not absolute. There are exceptions that have more to do with her emotional health, than her mental instability. If she has an eye on being in a relationship with you, she might provide that information freely, because it's not about hiding who she really is, but more about pleasing you to get you to stay interested.
Make no mistake about it, though: if a woman expects you to come to meet her far away, and she balks at providing her name, number, street address, phone number and place of employment, take this as a sign that something is not right with the situation.
If your background/veracity checks on your Significant Interest show anything suspicious or inaccurate, confront her politely. Her response will probably tell you all you need to know. If she is forthcoming and provides you with enough information to ease your mind, then great. But if she responds with anger or sarcasm or more lies, FORGET IT. This is in no way a person you can have a healthy relationship with, no matter how hot you think she is, or how much you have in common.
Also bear in mind that there are people out there who bait CyberCruisers and then lure them into all kinds of unsavory situations for profit or for sick entertainment. The person you are so enamored by, could even be a man getting his jollies, or a bored teenager. All the more reason to have photos-even though a person can send a photo of anyone and say it's of themselves, it's good to at least see if they can provide one easily. If you have some reason to mistrust the accuracy of the photo, you can always request the person take a new one, holding a sign with your name on it. That pretty much eliminates the problem. It's not likely that the fake picture they used was of their roommate, who then agreed to pose for the new one.
This happened to a friend of mine and the ruse went on for a month or more. Other red flags were there, but my friend saw what she wanted to see, until she did some investigating on her own and discovered the photos were stolen off another site. The Pretender didn't even have the sense to use a different name than the woman who was in the photos, who was, among other things, a model. All it took was emailing the woman in the photos to bust this Pretender.
I believe there are still many honest, quality people out there, but you have to be cautious until you know whether or not your Significant Interest is one of them. You might do everything right, and everything might check out, and then it can all go to hell in a handbasket. There is still danger. Even when you take all reasonable and even extended precautions, things can still go awry.
To illustrate this, another friend of mine who is highly intelligent, well-traveled, street-smart, cautious and even skilled at self-defense, had just such an experience. This friend, whom I can only identify as Sapphodite, tells the story she calls The Uh-Oh Incident. She had met a woman on the Internet who was in the legal profession, had connections to many powerful and respected people in her town, and presented herself as everything my friend was looking for in a partner. They communicated and spoke on the phone almost every day for five weeks before my friend decided to meet her.
She drove herself 13 hours to do this, discovering toward the end of the journey that the directions were inaccurate, which landed her in some dangerous neighborhoods late at night, and tacked on another 5 hours to her driving time. She was exhausted and stressed by the time she arrived.
Their planned activities included both a polo match and a fetish party. Now while I would not be interested in the fetish party myself, Sapphodite had lived in New Orleans in her twenties, and she was familiar with this sort of thing and it didn't offend her sensibilities. She thought it sounded like innocent fun. Sapphodite describes what happened:
Basically, she lied to me about many things including her "real" sexual persuasion and "real" intent. I ended up being put in harm’s way and having this so called friend turn on me with no regard for my well-being. I was drugged, ridiculed, pushed toward others advances, belittled, threatened, humiliated and ultimately thrown down the stairs and out into the parking lot. Let’s just say it was an awful learning experience. I never thought of myself as naive or overly trusting, but I now see where I made a few mistakes. (1) I gave in to her insistence of staying at her place and not getting a hotel (2) I rode with her to a party in her car while leaving my belongings and car keys in her apartment. (3) I was on guard about my beverage at the bar to insure no one could put anything in it. But I never dreamed that people dosed each other with high grades of ecstasy via "the kiss approach" i.e. I was gulping down my soda when someone blindsided me and kissed me, jutting her pill and tongue toward the back of my throat. You do not realize you've been dosed until you feel the effects, and of course, they laugh and tell you what they did. (4) I was four hours away from anyone who could help me. Although I totally fault this person for the experience.
Sapphodite realized that she was dosed with the intent of having a three-way with the girl who dosed her and the girl's male companion. Her hostess had apparently helped arrange all this.
My friend wound up sitting in her truck in the parking lot without some of her belongings, dressed in a leather dominatrix outfit from the party, freaking out on X, with the gun she always takes for protection on long trips under her seat.
For obvious reasons, this situation precluded her calling the police. How would she explain, with any semblance of credibility, her appearance and condition to a police officer? Since she was unable to drive herself to a hotel, she had to rely on that relative four hours away, to come rescue her.
Sapphodite continues,
I fault myself for not getting a hotel, not driving myself to the party, and not knowing more about the club etiquette of dosing, and going so far from anyone I could depend on in case of an emergency. I did come out of everything alright, and it could have been much worse. It was just a lesson I needed to learn, I guess. I had done a criminal background check on this woman before meeting her, and it came back clean. I did verify where she worked and called her at her law office. I did see many pictures and verified her address. I even called the police department to insure she was in a safe neighborhood. I took all the precautions I could think of, including talking to her via the phone for three weeks before agreeing to meet. Despite all my efforts this evil entity still made it under my radar.
This scenario is admittedly unusual, but it shows that anything can happen, even if you feel you have taken all precautions and can handle yourself. Sapphodite adds:
Word to the wise: crazy and perverted doesn't always equate to the dregs of society and the obvious red flags. Always assume that you may be in danger when meeting someone long distance for the first time. This way you will make wise decisions and not put yourself in a bad position that you will later, hopefully, be able to live to regret. Like my paramedic buddies say, "We have to assume that everyone we work on has AIDS, 'cause we aren't allowed to ask them and they may have it. We have to act like everyone does have it so we are astute enough to protect ourselves at all times." I don't think anyone will ever regret a little effort that may make all the difference in the long run.
I would add also that it is more important to be safe than to worry about how paranoid you appear. Paranoid will get you home okay, and worrying about what others think of your paranoia might get you hurt.
Desperation & Expectations 17 Dates Sexercise The Face of Dating Dating Caveats Minding Your Manners After the First Date Dating Red Flags & Deal Breakers
Meeting someone online is only effective when it is used as a means to connect, but then followed up fairly quickly with an in-person meeting. It doesn't matter much if you have all the Cyber-Chemistry in the world-the tangible evidence comes only when you meet the woman. After the online experience moves to in-person experience, the interaction is then about dating.
There is an inexplicable dynamic that takes place with someone in person that is in no way exclusively linked to the one on the phone or in CyberSpace. Brain chemicals operate sometimes without our understanding. And the body is electric. We are beings of energy. If your energy clashes with the energy of another, there's nothing you can do about it. That's an energy that cannot be transmitted electronically. (Regardless of the claims made by one woman who tried to give me Reiki treatment on an IM). We can use our communications online as a gauge, but it is in no way a guarantee.
This is another reason why it is crucial not to make promises about how you're going to respond to someone. Lesbians have a tendency to jump on top of their feelings like it's a furry little animal about to get away, wanting very much to pet and cuddle it. This smacks of desperation.
Desperations. Take one part sexual frustration, two parts loneliness, three parts overwhelming need to be needed and wanted, add an overzealous good-timer and beer, stir vigorously. Simmer well in a bed of cotton sheets, and you have a recipe for disaster.
When one hits the bottom of the Desperation Barrel, there is always someone else down there.
Sometimes we make ill-advised choices based on the ingredients we allow ourselves to stock. While we might not be proud of these one night stands that can, ironically, last months or years, we must appreciate the educational value of such an excursion. If we learn our lessons well, we will be loath to cook that dish again.
Desperation springs from insecurity. If you are not rooted in your own self-worth, your decisions will often be bad ones, based on that desperation, rather than common sense and wisdom. This is one reason why it is paramount to nurture a healthy self-esteem.
The shrewd and dishonest among us will take advantage of that at every turn. You must be able to err on the side of caution and self-value so that insecurity will never be the cause of your harm or demise.
Expectations. Once, I was shown very viscerally that the tone of my personal ad was counterproductive, as I mentioned earlier in the section about writing profiles. In delineating all my relationship parameters, I was creating an atmosphere of intimidation with any woman who was brave enough to contact me. And the fact that it was clearly an ad centered on finding a soulmate, a dynamic of expectation was also created.
Human nature will dictate how a person behaves when they believe they are on a sort of job interview for the position of your partner; even though this is the underlying atmosphere, it should remain in your own mind, and not be voiced outright. If a woman knows you are considering her seriously in that way, she is not as likely to be completely genuine in their interactions. If, instead, the meeting and dating experience is predicated on the casual pursuit of familiarity, then the pressure is lessened and each involved can be more relaxed. Too many expectations too soon can mutate the healthy dynamic of two people getting to know each other.
Lesbians are notorious for serial monogamy and it is a surprise that U-Haul is not a lesbian-owned business. We would be wise to buy stock in it. While this is somewhat amusing, it's also tragic. Lesbians are denying themselves the enriching experience of truly knowing another person before giving themselves over to passion, or to a commitment to share a life and home.
A friend of mine recently made the point that if you're not ready to marry someone, you're not ready to move in with them. Just because gay marriage is not as common, nor often legally sanctioned, it doesn't mean we should not approach it with the same forethought and seriousness that stable, thinking straight people do. A commitment to share a life and home with someone should not be taken lightly.
Statistically, people can only maintain a facade for 3 to 6 months in the dating realm, depending on the amount of time you spend with them. If you're dating them once a week, that period is more like 3 to 4 months. If you take your time with getting to know someone, you'll see what you need to see in that time, to decide whether or not you wish to take it to another level.
Justice Harlow created a rule of thumb for dating, that would allow this kind of time. She calls it "17 Dates Method." The idea is that if you go out with a woman seventeen times, experience them in varying situations, with various configurations of other people and alone, you will likely know by the end of that time, whether to pursue a relationship with this woman in earnest; not get married, or cohabitate, mind you-just whether to pursue it seriously. Really getting to know someone entails seeing them in all kinds of situations. You get an opportunity to see how they behave, how they treat other people, how they treat you, and how much they care about the quality of time they spend with you. You also usually get a glimpse of them in stressful situations, as appreciable time spent usually results in some uncomfortable event, or change of plans, or some other scenario that requires them to reveal their character.
I have since tried to apply this method, but sadly, haven't gotten past five or six dates, at best. This is in no way proof that the method doesn't work. On the contrary, I knew by those first few dates, that these women were not for me. So, if you can't tolerate the 17 dates, you can't tolerate the woman in any permanent fashion, either, and the method has then proved its value.
It is important to note that no method will be foolproof; there are plenty of fools, after all. But if you realize that having 17 dates, or knowing someone for at least 4 months is the goal, you're on your way to avoiding an entire category of misfortune.
I was asked once if I was more likely to engage in sexual behavior if I thought that woman had long term potential. It took me a while to answer. The possibility of a meaningful, long term relationship means that I have some feelings for this person, and it's natural for me to want to express that. It also means I am attracted to her, and the need to have sex becomes stronger.
But on the other side of that coin, if it is meaningful, then I want a foundation. The strongest foundation is built on friendship and familiarity, and this can be totally ruined by having sex too fast. So the answer would be, I'm probably more likely to do it if I thought the woman had long term potential, but hope I could wait long enough to make sure it's a solid relationship before I do.
If there could be a third side to a coin, I would add that sex with a friend or a fuckbuddy might well serve to assuage the frustration that often makes us have sex with someone we wish to cultivate as a friend first, and then a lover. If your carnal needs are being met elsewhere, it might be less likely that you will be in such a hurry, should you meet someone special. This seems to work well up until the point you have some actual romantic interest in another woman, and then, of course, it would be difficult to have sex with someone you don't feel romantic toward, and it would not be ethical, either. If you are addressing your carnal needs with a fuckbuddy or Friends With Benefits scenario, and you meet someone special, you should cease and desist with the casual sex you are having with someone else. But we never know how long we'll be without someone to feel romantic about. So this method has some merit.
In examining these areas of sexual behavior, I have noticed a common denominator. Women who at first glance might seem a bit promiscuous, were often not sexually active in their younger years. The behavior seems to stem from an unfulfilled need that is visited upon them when they find themselves single later in life. Then they are frequently vexed by a duality: they want to behave with class and dignity, yet they crave the excitement of exploring sex with more than one partner. There's something to be said for sowing your wild oats early.
Dating, then, is a skill, just as much as communication or lovemaking or cooking. It employs knowledge and understanding of human nature, psychology, sociology, among other things. The more you understand about human nature, the more successful you will be at it. Dating is a social activity that helps us develop interpersonal skills, but it is also intended to be the most effective way to find a lifemate.
Dating has also changed in the last decade. What once was acceptable, now is not, and what once was not acceptable, now is. I am often unsure if these changes are about evolution or deterioration of the species.
Among lesbians, dating is a territory all its own. There is a certain amount of brainwashing going on in society, and women have borne the brunt of this since The Garden. We are taught that women are the weaker sex, that women need to be taken care of, that they are fragile and helpless and are not allowed to be aggressive or take on a role that is commonly thought to belong to the male gender. This confusion can be seen in women who discover their homosexuality, and then refashion themselves into that masculine manner in order to be with other women; or even let themselves go, as if their appearance no longer mattered. While I believe this appearance-apathy happens in the straight community as well, I think it's more prevalent in the lesbian community, and with lesbians it seems to happen before relationships, rather than after.
One friend of mine told me about a woman who had spent her life being straight, only to discover she was in denial, and then began to live more authentically as lesbian. The woman then ceased to care about her personal appearance, dressed in only casual clothes, and stopped wearing makeup, saying, "I'm a lesbian. What a relief that I don't have to worry about that stuff anymore." Now, why wouldn't she spend as much effort presenting herself in a positive fashion to other women, as she did with men? And now, she is currently fraught with confusion about why she can't find the high quality women she seeks. You catch according to the bait you provide. I contend that this attention to our appearance is not about pleasing a man, but about pleasing ourselves, and putting our best selves forward.
Our social or public selves speak volumes about our self-esteem. If we show others that we don't care about our appearance, we are telling them much more than we think. If we give our partners or dates nothing to be attracted to, we can't expect them to stay interested. That's human nature, too.
Here are a few bits of advice about dating in general:
Don't be late. Does this really need an explanation? Punctuality is a sign of respect. If you think that fashionably-late is the way to go, remember, that's intended for large parties where there are lots of people who can get along fine with or without your presence; if it's someone waiting just for you, have the courtesy to be on time.
First dates are not meant to be marathons. Don't do lunch or dinner. Do coffee or a quick drink. Don't plan drinks, dinner, a show and a walk through the park. If spending time with them quickly becomes painful, you don't want prolonged agony. You want to know it's going to end soon. The first date should not be an exercise in endurance.
You can make the date by saying, "Yeah, let's meet for a quick drink before I have to go do such and such at a certain time." My best suggestion is, again, the honest approach: "Hey, let's just meet for coffee for a half hour. That way, if we don't hit it off, there won't be any prolonged suffering for either of us." And try to laugh a little when you say that. Humor eases tension and it also makes this a potential rejection on her part so that she doesn't feel you are placing yourself above her. Now, the exception is if you discover the two of you have great rapport. In that case, the date can always be prolonged.
Always meet in a public place. It's way too soon to be introducing you to family, or seeing where she lives, or going out on the boat with friends. Don't agree to that. And the woman who wants to meet at the Motel 6 is not intent on knowing your views on Global Warming or where you went to college. A public place provides a buffer zone if things get uncomfortable. Which leads me to:
Take a cell phone. Always wise these days anytime you leave the house, but also for the purpose of meeting someone new. I am not a proponent of using the fake phone call method. I'm always for the honest approach whenever possible, but if you get in a situation with a woman who does not respond to the honest approach, or if she's just a certifiable nutjob, it's tempting to have an excuse to leave. That's where the "I have to leave in thirty minutes" excuse comes in. If this woman is actually frightening, then the excuse that you have an errand has already been mentioned. Hopefully, though, things won't be this dismal. Just make sure she doesn't follow you home.
Dress appropriately and with care. You are about to make a first impression, and this will be a lasting one, so make an effort. This is not about vanity, it's about self-respect. If you're the type who shows up in shorts, combat boots, a tank top and a ball cap, you'd better hope this woman made it clear that's what she's attracted to. It's not necessary to wear a ball gown, but make sure you are well-groomed, your clothes are clean, wrinkle free, and they match. All the stuff your mother should have told you when you learned to dress yourself. Think Garanimals. And for god's sake, don't be afraid to wear some makeup to accentuate the positive. You're a girl.
Don't go to a movie. This is a bad way to get to know someone, and the initial date is ABOUT that. You can't (or shouldn't) talk in a movie theatre. Instead, meet at a bistro or coffee shop where the music is low and you can address each other face to face over a latte. This is also a quick way to learn about her communication skills and whether or not the two of you have a natural rapport.
Don't be a bore. Don't drone on incessantly about your job or your nieces and nephews; and no one really cares how much you love your Labrador. This can also make you seem too attached to animals, at the expense of human interaction.
Instead, have good manners, make eye contact, nod and respond periodically with "Yes" or "Uh huh" or "Exactly"...something to show you are paying attention. Don't make the irritating mistake of saying "uh huh" every few seconds, though. I've known people who do this, and it can blow things immediately.
Another thing to watch out for is repeating yourself when you speak. Common repetitive words and phrases are "you know" and "uhhhhhhhhh..." and "like." For example, "I was like, you know, really into the concert but... uhhhhhhhhhhh...it was, you know, kinda loud you know and like I thought my uh, my uhhhhh eardrums were gonna burst." Expressing yourself clearly and succinctly is also a skill worth learning.
Learn Reflective Listening skills. Allow the other person to speak, and respond in the natural gaps in conversation. If there are no natural gaps, then that means the other woman needs to learn some communication skills. Reflective listening also entails clarification. If she says something you're not quite sure of, say, "I hear you saying you are more an Independent than a Democrat." Then she can agree, disagree, or clarify. This shows her you're listening to content and trying to understand what she means.
Don't confuse a date with a visit to your therapist. The fact that your ex-girlfriend ripped your heart out is not a good topic, nor your stint in rehab, nor how you hate your mother. If this is all you can talk about, you should be visiting a therapist, and not going on a date. Deal with your baggage on your own time.
Keep the conversation light and casual. Go at it like you are making friends with this person. All good relationships are based on friendship anyway.
Sometimes the issue with CyberCruising is that the profiles you fill out tell an awful lot about someone, and this leaves nothing to talk about in person. Try to be a little mysterious in your profile, therefore. Give just enough information to reveal the type of person you are, but leave something for actual conversation.
To that end, you can ask her about TV programs she likes to watch and why; ask her about the last book she read and what she thought about it; ask her where she went on her last vacation, where she used to live and how she liked it; ask her where she attended college and what her major was; ask what her personal goals are for the next year; what her best and worst decisions were, and why. Ask her what thing she would like to do over in her life, and how she'd change it this time around.
If you go prepared with a few questions, and you have rapport, you will find that conversation is very organic and will lead itself. Don't try to have a heavy discussion at this point, just get a feel for each other and try to have a good time. If you start delineating the list of criteria you have for a partner, you will seem desperate, pushy...and maybe a little mental.
If you asked her out, you pay. If she asked you, she should. This is common courtesy and has nothing to do with playing roles.
Listen to your gut. In all forms of romantic encounters, it is essential that we listen to our intuition. Deepak Chopra teaches that contrary to what society and the mainstream religions tells us, paying attention to our physical selves is not only helpful, but in fact crucial to our health and well-being. Our bodies are intelligent, and when we feel uneasy about someone, there's a very good reason.
If you say, "I have a gut feeling about such and such," you aren't speaking metaphorically. The phrase is rooted in science. The cells in your gut make the same peptides that your brain makes when it has ideas. You probably can trust your gut cells even more, because they haven't yet evolved to the stage where they doubt their own thinking.[2]
Thus, any anxiety you feel in an encounter with someone should be taken seriously. Make an agreement with yourself that you will pay attention to how your body responds to others. In the romantic arena, pay special attention, and notice over a period of time the accuracy of these physiological assessments. You will find that more often than not, your body-linked intuition is remarkably infallible.
If you have an anxiety disorder or suffer from some form of agoraphobia, you might be able to mark it up to that. But if you don't, listening to your body is wise and can often help you make all the right decisions.
[2] Trust Your Gut, interview with Deepak Chopra, contextmag.com.
You didn't have to attend the Miss Manners School of Etiquette to have gleaned some common sense rules about how to behave while dating. Social skills are of the utmost importance if you wish to be perceived as a person of class. You don't have to know which fork to use for the salad, but you'd better know not to scratch your itchy head with it.
I have pointed out that I'm not generally attracted to women of the butch variety. Most of my experience with butch women has been in the Southern regions of the country, so I'm not clear about whether or not this is true for them nationwide. I was in a relationship with a butch woman, though, and have been with others who were not exactly feminine. That's how I know what I like and don't like.
My main complaint about women like this is their demeanor. It seems very few of them have any idea what good manners are. These are the ones who think it's perfectly acceptable to wear a greasy ball cap and dip Skoal, drink too much, talk too loud, forget to buy me a drink when they're getting one for themselves, belch the alphabet, or fart. Oh, and getting so drunk that standing is a challenge is not impressive either. Not only is this disturbingly reminiscent of some uncouth men, but it is simply inappropriate behavior in any social setting.
And just for the record, first kisses should never be had in a bathroom stall, either. I've known that to happen in lesbian bars, and it even happened to me. What does it say about a woman's opinion of you, when she will press her lips to yours the first time amid toilet paper, cigarette butts and god knows what kind of smell? Aesthetics aside, if a first kiss isn't special enough to treat with respect, how do you think this woman will treat you in other areas, once she's "caught" you?
Aside from those extreme examples, it's not good manners to snort and hack and spit either. Nor is it an indication of good class and breeding to mention how much you like "to eat pussy."
A few years ago, my friends and I were out for some drinks at a local saloon, and were introduced to a woman by another acquaintance. I felt an immediate attraction to her and it was not something I could explain. This woman, whom I'll call Casey, was wearing a navy blue two-piece jogging suit, no makeup, and was average looking, but cute. We had immediate rapport. I had not felt an in-person spark like that in so long, I couldn't even say.
I rarely share small talk with anyone-I personally hate it-so we did have a few light but meaningful conversations that evening. She told me she was a single mother of a small child, lived in another town that was too close knit for her to be herself in, and so she visited my town to have a good time periodically.
The bar we were in was pretty dead, so we all agreed to migrate to another one. As the evening progressed, she did a lot of dancing and mingling, but always returned to the table, and seemed to be intensely interested in me. She was also a little lit.
Being around a drunk person generally serves as a repulsion for me. So I couldn't explain the fact that I still had sparks for this woman. She seemed to feel the same way, because she gave me many compliments and eventually wound up sitting in my lap and hugging me a lot. I had to know what this was all about. I was not seeing anyone at the time and had decided not to go out for the New Year's Holiday. Now I had a reason to reconsider. I told her I hadn't intended to celebrate this year, but asked her if she had plans for New Year's Eve.
She said, "I didn't, do I now?"
Well that was just charming, so I asked her to be my date and she enthusiastically accepted. Remember, this was back before I had a long string of dating experiences, so I should have paid more attention to the red flags; in myself, as much as in her.
We exchanged phone numbers and had several long, enjoyable conversations before the date, which was only a week away. I felt we still had great rapport, and she seemed to remember everything about the night we met, so I was pretty sure her behavior wasn't just the alcohol.
It had been a while since I'd had a date I was truly interested in having, and I was frustrated. I wanted a social life, and I had fallen into isolation since moving to the town. So I spent a great deal of time preparing for this event, and it was to be a double date with my best friend and a woman she was seeing. We were supposed to meet at a club where Casey's friend worked.
When the night came, and my date didn't show, I tried to call but couldn't reach her, so left her a message. I had never been stood up, and I assumed something had happened. I located Casey's friend who worked at the club we were in, and asked if she knew anything. She called Casey from a phone in the back, and reached her. It seemed that she was waiting on the father of her son to come pick him up, but if he didn't show, she said she still had someone to be a sitter. Problem was, she was also dealing with a migraine. She didn't know if she was going to make it, but she'd "try." I left instructions for Casey where we'd be.
I was hugely disappointed, of course, but my concern was that she was ill. I told her friend to call her back and tell her I hoped she felt better, and if she did, we would either be there or at the other club in town we had gone to before, should she manage to conquer her headache. And if all else failed, we'd simply reschedule for another date, another time. I didn't have a cell phone at the time, but Casey knew the number to the club and her friend who worked there-and the number of the other club, and she also had my home number. I could be reached.
I sat across the table from my best friend and her date at the other club, hoping to see my date arrive, and as the night wore on, and I got no phone call and no appearance from her, it became painfully obvious that wasn't going to happen. I felt like a chump. I was humiliated. I didn't know whether to cry or get angry and I think I did a little of both. I continued to drown my sorrows and took a short trip on the Intoxication Railway. My best friend said she had never seen me that drunk. I'm not proud of my behavior; I allowed the experience to get to me way too much. I look back on it now, and I know my reaction would have been very different, if I had known what I know now.
I never heard from Casey again. No call that night to say she couldn't make it after all. No call the next day to apologize and offer an explanation. Nothing. She just dropped off the face of the earth. I have since spoken to Casey's friend, and she had no idea what happened. I don't think they were that close.
So Casey remains a mystery to me. I never got closure on that one. But it is without question, a deal breaker. Even if she called and offered some sort of explanation and wanted to see me, I would flatly refuse. The respect and trust and integrity had been destroyed by her inability to extend the courtesy of a phone call.