Dating In This Economy Part One: Meeting Someone

Hey Alessia,

With all this talk about people staying home in this economy, do you have any tips for meeting new people to date?

I’m thinking going door-to-door is a bad idea ;)

Samantha

You’re right, Samantha, going door-to-door like a Girl Scout with your cookies is not recommended.

Happy Girl Scouts

While I think the hype about the economy keeping people home is slightly exaggerated (people still need to go to work, buy food, and exit their homes; we are not living in bomb shelters), I think now’s as good a time as any to review some tips on where to meet guys & girls to date.

This list of suggestions is primarily based on suggestions I give to self-described “shy” &/or “bookish” people who say their “lack of social butterfly status” makes it more difficult to find potential dates, but if you believe that the soft economy makes for hard times finding guys (or girls), then here’s a list of five tips for making it easier to find someone:

1. If you’re old like me, you probably remember back in the 90′s how so many dating advisers suggested you meet a potential mate at the grocery store. I personally found this advice rather silly; treating the frozen foods isle or butcher section like a meet (or meat) market is asking for lots of mistakes to be made. Since I cannot cook, the idea of the humiliation of hitting on husbands shopping off the wifey’s grocery list & gay guys made me laugh & cringe… But I also think it is impractical because hanging out in a grocery store is not only creepy but a huge time investment — spent on your feet yet! However…

If you want a mate who can & will do the cooking, hang out at the local farmer’s market. Unlike grocery stores which are open long hours (some even 24/7), farmers’ markets are typically run for a few hours on weekend mornings, making your cruising times more realistic. Because they are “events,” not “just shopping,” you’ll find most people are strolling along, willing to talk, and more relaxed and open in general than when they are in a rush running errands. Not only are you likely to identify (especially over time with multiple visits) single men & have more opportunity to have conversations, but buying fresh foods grown locally will improve your diet, save you money, and put money back into your local economy too.

2. If you’re convinced that folks in your town are holing up at home more to save money, then keep your eyes open when making your own home entertainment arrangements. Bookstores, video rental places, gardening centers, stores that sell games, music retailers, hobby supply centers, sporting good stores, etc. — all places you probably are going anyway, so just keep your eyes open for other regular shoppers & start a conversation.

If you don’t have any interests — get some. Seriously; life’s too short to spend it laying like a vegetable on your couch, whether you are doing it alone or as a couple.

3. People are still visiting cheap places. Check your local community calender listings for free or inexpensive events in your interest area. The holiday season is an especially good time for parties, charity fundraisers, etc.; summer offers food & music festivals, flea markets, state & local fairs, etc. Make the most of community resources, like libraries, parks, museums, art galleries, historical societies, zoos, colleges & universities, which often have lecture series, book readings, plays, concerts, & other special events.

Many of these places also offer membership options which include free or discounted admission rates for members — which makes frequent visits affordable.

Those old theaters in the old downtown areas often have free or cheap film retrospectives & festivals. Even malls have those weekend events, like fashion shows, craft fairs, art shows, antique sales. There are lots of things; look for them and attend them.

4. Support local community organizations by volunteering. Some of these organizations can be found in your local papers & online, of course; but don’t overlook calls to the United Way etc. for help matching you with an organization &/or program that needs your skills & help to serve an issue you believe in.

You’re sure to find other singles who are caring and committed to the same concerns & issues that you are — or make friends who just happen to know someone who is single and looking for a girl like you…

You’ll be able to pay it forward & help people while you wait for Mr. or Ms. right.

5. As always, my number one suggestion for meeting new people is to hang out with family & friends, meet their friends and accept set-ups. While we may groan internally at such things, ignore such things and the plethora of negative film & television portrayals of such dates. Studies indicate that we really do find the best relationship matches when we are set up by family & friends. This is because we & our set-up (or blind date) will typically have shared values, similar socio-economic backgrounds, and common interests — as well as the support of family & friends. All these things increase compatibility & long term relationship success — things you can’t afford to ignore in any economy.

So get on the bandwagon, put on a sunny face and face the day. Who knows you you may find along the way?

Image credits: Channel One

Can He Last Three Minutes?

In the November issue of O (and that stands for Oprah, not Orgasm or Overstock.com), Dr. Helen Fisher discusses love at first site — or something rather close in her What’s Love Got To Do With It? column, “The First Three Minutes.”

Retro Tina-Turner-tune-title aside, the article itself is rather fascinating as it says that the first three minutes are essential for romance — and yes, Virginia, there is such a thing as love at first sight.

Fisher says — and my decades of dating experience agrees — that it takes less than one second to decide whether you find someone physically attractive. Then, if the dude passes, women listen. But what they are listening for may surprise you…

Women generally regard rapid talkers talkers as more educated and men with full, deep voices as better-looking than they are.

What the men say is also important — but, it seems, that even if we don’t really love the sound of our own voices, we are hoping to hear ourselves:

We like people who use the same words we use.

We are also drawn to those who have a similar degree of intelligence, share our religious and social values, and come from the same economic background — and we quickly determine these attributes from a man’s words (not to mention how he dresses and wears his hair, whether he’s carrying a briefcase of a soccer ball, and if he’s sporting a gold watch or a tattoo).

If all this sounds a bit too easy to be true, Fisher notes a survey by Ben-Gurion University’s Dr. Ayala Malach-Pines which says that maybe it is: Only 11% of her survey respondents said their long-term relationships began with love at first site.

So then Fisher points out that psychologists say that the the more you interact with a person you like (even slightly), the more you will come to find them good-looking, smart — and the all important “similar to you.”

Unless, that is, you discover a real deal-breaker.

But then that’s what dating is for, right? To spot the bad stuff before you have the mortgage, the kids, and a dog you both want.

Click the pic to read the entire scanned article:

helen-fisher-first-three-minutes-o-magazine

Why Women Opt To Remain Single

A woman goes out with her friends, meets a guy named Dmitri and they talk for “at the most 2 minutes.” She hands him her business card and says call me… These are the voicemails he leaves her (with some images added for video appeal):

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c06pinaKl8o[/youtube]

Dating Fear Mongering, Single Mom Edition

Once again, supposed experts shoot their mouths off, using salacious headlines and fear to label & manipulate women; this time the horrible deeds are being done by Robert Siciliano at Single Minded Women.

In the article, Siciliano paints single mothers as easy prey for sexual predators:

…the one under-discussed, over looked and “it can’t happen to me” aspect of being on the dating scene is your personal security, and that of your children. In fact, online dating is one way pedophiles find their next victims (through unsuspecting single mothers looking for love and perhaps a male role model for their children).

While the supposed security expert infuriates me with his depiction of single moms as so eager for love that they’d sacrifice their own children, it’s only going to get worse:

As the saying goes, “water seeks its own level” which means unhealthy, insecure people seek each other out; this often leads to destructive relationships. But what’s worse is insecure people often seek out destructive, unhealthy and sometimes violent people. We’ve all read the story, the single woman or single mom who couldn’t break the cycle of always settling for less, and winds up a statistic.

Healthy, conscious, right minded people don’t settle for less and can sense “bad” from a mile away. They are secure, and often are aware of their personal security as well. When something doesn’t look or seem right, they pay attention to their senses and get themselves out of what may become a dangerous situation. They cut their losses and chalk it up to a learning experience. Others get deeper into destruction.

There is a clear parallel here between what would be considered a healthy potential mate, and a predator that has nothing but bad intentions. The good guy actively pursues what he believes to be his heart and does things to romance his potential mate. The bad guy does the same thing but in the name of personal gain, manipulation and evil. Predators will target anyone who will give them their time and attention. Often a smooth talking good looking guy, who is a predator, may win over the attention of a healthy and conscious woman, but she will soon see there’s something wrong with the guy. Whereas an unhealthy woman who is unsure of her personal security will settle for less and in some cases put her and her children at risk. Sadly, sometimes loneliness trumps consciousness.

Sadly, sometimes it’s media-hungry experts who consciously prey upon the fears & insecurities of the humans they pretend to be helping.

The real “clear parallel” that Siciliano seems to be operating off of is his non-documented notion that single mothers are single parents because they are “unhealthy,” “insecure,” “destructive,” & therefore somehow more likely to put their children at risk.

Think I’m exaggerating? Here’s his first bit of helpful (and tainted) advice (page 2):

First make sure you have a healthy strong mind and your self esteem is in order. Read as many self help books as possible, go to weekend empowerment retreats, associate with friends that are goal oriented and have their life in order, shred any baggage you may have and most importantly, “know thyself”; which means to understand oneself is to understand others as well.

Like all self help books are full of sound advice. *snort* Like those with real (not author-imagined) mental health issues are able to trust their way to “health” through a book alone — or trust their friends (doesn’t that “water seeks its own level” business apply to friends too?)

The rest of his advice for dating safely online is fine; rather generic and based on the commonsense advice your friends give you (and not unlike what mom told you in the years before the internet & other tech gadgets), but his message gets lost in the fear-mongering & victim blaming.

If there is any connection (and I’ve not yet ready any study that indicates this) between single moms’ children being at risk from pedophiles and/or sexual predators, I’m willing to bet that this has less to do with the single mother’s poor self esteem than it does with access to the children.

Just as biological dad has access to his own kids, step-dad or mom’s boyfriend is there to watch the kids while she works, runs errands, etc. In both cases (as with uncles, other family members, clergy, etc.), these males are (eventually) trusted to be alone with the children; trust being something the criminal works hard to gain. It’s a matter of single mothers working, meaning a higher rate of absenteeism from home; not something necessarily borne of an “unhealthy” single mom putting her children at risk for the sake of her own loneliness.

Are some pedophiles using dating sites to target victims? Sure they are. Just like rapists are. But targeting victims isn’t new. Before the internet and dating sites, those willing to commit sex crimes against children were trolling parks, volunteering to coach or otherwise be with & supervise children, etc. looking for victims. (I they wanted adult female victims, they knew what they were looking for & did their best to find the situational windows to take advantage of.)

Like Celeste Moyers, the director of the Safer Online Dating Alliance, said two years ago (when Good Morning America covered this “story”), “If someone wants to do harm, that person will find a way to do it.”

“People are caught off guard,” she said. “Even the smartest savviest online dater can be a victim of sexual assault.”

So why is this fact buried in most of the coverage of this issue — and absent from Siciliano’s salacious story?

Because it’s preferred to blame the victim — and the victim’s mother — rather than to hold the victimizing, criminal pedophile responsible.

Shame on Robert Siciliano for playing up & preying on the fears of female single parents, for labeling them “unhealthy” for not being married, for blaming them for somehow increasing the potential victimization of their children.

Refreshingly Honest Pond Scum

I have mixed feelings about AshleyMadison.com, the “married dating & affairs” site… With a trademarked tagline of “Life is short. Have an affair.” they’re really putting the “tery” in adult dating sites. The adultery dating site even guarantees “an affair to remember.” While I suppose divorce court, public shunning, and loss of respect from your own family are all things you’d remember (literally protecting the guarantee), what the guarantee actually does is offer your money back if you don’t err, have an affair.

According to this article (page 2):

It’s free to become a member and to create a profile and search others. But to chat with another member, a user has to buy credits– $49 for 100 credits (it takes five credits to initiate a chat; subsequent back-and-forth chats are free). For the Affair Guarantee Membership it’s $249 and the Web site will refund your money if you don’t have an affair in three months. “If somebody had a genuine, sincere message and sounded like a nice person, I would send a message back,” she says. “You had to really weed through those who didn’t want what you wanted.”

(And don’t you just love the idea of a person screening requested messages for affairs for “genuine, sincere & nice” people to cheat with?)

Obviously, the whole idea is disheartening. But these people are going to break their vows with or without AshleyMadison.com — and if that means there are less of the lying cheats on other dating sites and social networks, then that’s a good thing. And hey, at least these like-minded cheaters are being honest with one another; they are all saying they are just there to get inside one another’s pants.

Then again, I suppose AshleyMadison.com has its own liars… People who aren’t married who just want a lay. But again, let them stick to fishing in that dirty water with the other pond scum — refreshingly honest pond scum.

Are Dating Messages Too Ambiguous? And What Does That Mean About Rape?

In the journal Personality and Individual Differences (Volume 47, Issue 2, July 2009, Pages 145-149), T. Joel Wade, Lauren K. Butrie & Kelly M. Hoffman present findings of a study on the male perceptions of women’s opening lines. The study, dissected in further detail at PsyBlog, reveals that men prefer women to be very direct — to the point of being boringly blunt. Ladies should ask a man to dinner (#1) as opposed to asking him if he’s busy that weekend (#6); ask him if he’s got a girlfriend (#2) rather than ask about what shows he’s watched (#5).

But the most surprising finding, at least to PsyBlog, was this:

The only surprise is the low ranking of funny or sexual humour. Men don’t seem to appreciate the lewd come-ons suggested by gender stereotypes. This relatively low rating for a jokey approach is another thing shared by both sexes. Previous work by Bale et al. (2006) found that women weren’t particularly impressed with men trying to be funny, despite what we are often told. It seems opening lines are a serious business for both sexes.

This is not surprising to me or readers of this blog — remember when I told you that men, no matter what they say, do not want sexually aggressive women? But it’s interesting to note for another very important reason…

Remember all that commotion & conversation about Steve Ward’s stupid & misogynistic comment on Vh1’s Tough Love? You know, where supporters of Ward’s and those who blamed the victim in the name of Women’s Safety alike declared that Ward’s statement that Arian “would end up raped if she kept talking like that” was accurate and well-intentioned?

These people believe(d) that his (sometimes even admittedly inept) scare tactic was a tool to get Arian (and others) to “wake up” to reality. Of course, they forget that rape is not an act of “misunderstanding” and “misplaced lust” but one of violence; but we’ll ignore that for now and just look at how this study is more proof that Steve Ward is the tool.

Men (and women too), do not find frank sexual talk and humor to be an arousing come-on; it’s actually more of a turn-off.

So there, ladies and gents, you have more proof that wildly sexual talk is less likely to inspire a man to think she’s into him than if she has asked him out to dinner.

And, just to be clear, asking a man to dinner is not a signal for rape. (Heaven help me if any of you argue that point!)

No word, still, on just how direct a woman has to be to communicate that No means No.

So I am still left badgering the point that society needs to condemn acts of sexual violence. We’ll need to say it loud and clear, of course.

Perhaps by way of introduction. “Hi, I’m Alessia and sexual assault and domestic violence are not acceptable.”

I think I’ll get that made on a t-shirt.

Your Mr. Right May Be Out To Sea

The Emmy & Peabody-award-winning company that produces Project Runway, Top Chef, and other top notch shows, Magical Elves, is currently working on and casting a new documentary series (read: reality television series) for a major television network “about marriage and people looking to get married” — specifically to find a suitor for a “handsome, tall, successful, and charismatic adventurer who is ready to settle down.”

Our chosen guy is a boat captain and dive instructor who frequents the Bahamas and absolutely loves the ocean. He is kind, funny and genuinely hoping to find his better half. Could it be you?

We’re looking for females who fit the following:

30-45 years old
physically fit / active
spiritual
liberal minded
pet friendly
Non-smoker
social
Intellectual
Outdoor / Adventurous
Must love water

Participants with children under 18 will not be considered at this time.

You know it’s all about the ratings-matings game here, more than true love, right? If you’re into that kind of abuse you can apply here, or to Magic Elves directly. (Please tell them Alessia of Relationship Underarm Stick sent you!)

If you wonder just who applies to these sorts of things, you can vote on casting applicants here.

PS Don’t forget to enter my contest!

Real Women, Real Sizes, Real Love — Real Casting

Fox Network, Next Entertainment in association with Warner Horizon Television, and Mike Fleiss, producer of The Bachelor, have teamed up to produce More to Love, “billed as the first “dating show for the rest of us’.” It’s promoting itself as a dating show for average folks, “Real women. Real sizes. Real love.”

“We want to send the message that you can be the size you are and still be lovable,” [Fleiss] said. “We aren’t going to thin these girls down so they can find love — that’s a backwards message.”

They are currently casting nationwide, looking for women who are curvy, beautiful, sexy, at least the age of 23 (and appear under 35) who are ready to be introduced to their soul mates — as well as America’s television viewing audience.

If you’re selected, you’ll be flown to Los Angeles to star in the show; no air date has been selected.

To apply, visit www.MoreToLoveCasting.com — or go to an open casting call at select Lane Bryant stores. Don’t forget to tell ’em Alessia of Relationship Underarm Stick sent ya!

Maxim Readers In Relationships Met Where?

Continuing my look at Maxim‘s 2009 Sex Survey

An interesting point to note is that of the 45.8% of women who claim to be in a relationship at the time of this survey, 57.3% of them met their current partner via friends. That’s greater than all the other options (18.9% at work, 10.8% at bar or club, 13% online *) combined.

Granted, that list isn’t every possible way for singles to meet, but I think the heavy dip towards introduction by friends proves my point that meeting people through people you know (aka having friends and a social life) works. And that the fact that your friends know & approve of these guys makes dating more likely to turn into relationships; this pre-screening makes these matches more acceptable to your support network and that increases your success as a couple.

This is not to say that there is no other way, but the old traditional methods still apply to dating today.

Meeting through friends means those in the group will have a greater number of things in common. Not just social activities and interests either. Compatibility has as much to do with similar religious, economic, social or class backgrounds, and other cultural issues (the roots of “values,” if you will), which means that your “at home” feeling with one another is more than just the bond of the familiarity of the faces in your social circle.

So hook up through your friends already.

* Click the scan to read the bit titled, Internet Hating; it’s as much a warning as it is a hoot to read. (Unlike my nemesis publication, Cosmo, Maxim‘s humor is spot-on, not kitsch.)

Better Fish In Another Pond?

You got the looks, the career, the car, the social network — everything but Mr. Right and you want him!!

If you’re female, age 25 to 40, single, attractive and successful in every aspect of life except one… If you’ve ever had that feeling that Mr. Right is out there but not where you live… That there are other fish in the sea — but you’re on the wrong shore… That if you could just leave town, go to another state, you’d meet that perfect guy? If this sounds like you — or someone you know — you’ll be interested in what ABC Media Productions has planned.

Right now, they’re casting for a new reality special called Holidate to be broadcast this fall on SOAPnet. Sort of like a Wife Swap for singles and the Cameron Diaz, Kate Winslet, Jude Law, & Jack Black film Holiday, Holidate will arrange for two single women to temporarily swap locations, live at the other’s home, date men in the other woman’s social circle, etc., and stay in touch with one another on their “journey to find love” in this search for better fishing.

The show will provide all the details and the plane ticket; you just have to believe in love, be willing to have your attempts at love be broadcast on television, and, of course, risk the giant “what ifs” of what happens if you do find Mr. Right and have to work out a long distance relationship & the pragmatic stuff of just who moves…

(Maybe that’s the topic of SOAPnet’s next reality special?)

To apply or nominate another single woman for casting in the special, please submit your name, age, occupation, city & state, along with a recent photo &/or MySpace or Facebook page link to HolidateCasting@yahoo.com. You may also contact the casting directors directly: Ulysses Lee (singleladiescasting@yahoo.com) or Kristina Gorolevich (KristinaCasting@yahoo.com). Or you can use this handy online form.

As always, please tell folks that Alessia of Relationship Underarm Stick sent you. Thanks!

Of Labeling, Limiting & Running Your Fingers Down Some New Spines

Andi (of Outer Limits — a most fun blog), has an excellent post: lesbian fiction, or does this book make me look gay? (Who doesn’t get sucked into reading with a title like that?!)

Her discussion (similar to this round-table: Labeling Lesbian Fiction Debate) centers on the issue of whether or not it is a service, a disservice, or a meaningless point, to label works of fiction as “lesbian.”

I’m straight (but not narrow), so maybe my opinion doesn’t really count — but I’m not afraid of books or movies or TV shows or whatever with lesbians or gay or trans folk. If people want to play Guess The Reader’s Orientation By Her Book Purchases (Or Reading Habits), that’s their little game & I don’t care. Besides, they’d be puzzled anyway.

I think separating books by “character orientation” is as silly as categorizing them by marital status. So if we have “Gay Mysteries”, “Bisexual Westerns, “Trans Literature” and “Lesbian Sci-Fi” then why not have “Celibate Sci-Fi” (maybe that’s redundant? lol), “Old Maid Romance” (err, that fits some people who confuse fantasy fiction with real life expectations for relationships) and “Heterosexual Monogamous Adventures” (if strictly read in the missionary position, it’s surely an oxymoron)… Though “Married & Not Getting Any Mysteries” might actually be found in self-help. Heh.

I joke, but I’m serious about segregating books based on character orientation. What’s next, stories with African American characters can only sit on shelves at the back of the store? Because that’s what these categories feel like to me; just another way to label and limit.

A good detective story, adventure, or love story, is a good read no matter what labels the publisher or Barnes & Nobel clerk assigns the book in the shelving process. Fictional characters & their stories are no more limited to their orientation — or gender, race, marital status, religious beliefs, political party or any other label — then real people are. When you categorize, label, and therefore limit the fictional people, you are inches away from limiting the real people.

Which brings us to dating.

While it’s good to know yourself and know the characteristics you’re looking for & even require in a mate, it’s ridiculous to categorize, label and limit potential dates — you’re only limiting yourself.

OK, so maybe being totally, inflexibly straight &/or Republican means you may have limit yourself in a category or two.  But it doesn’t mean you need to ignore a million other people by the labels they have or the labels you think they have.  Meeting other people means you’ll be exposed to more characters, more stories.

So go ahead, run your fingers along a few spines outside your typical categories; see what new characters you find and what new stories you’ll have to tell.

20/20’s The Science of Seduction: Why Him, Why Her?

Live blogging 20/20’s show The Science of Seduction: Why Him, Why Her?

When I first heard about the show, which is sort of based upon biological anthropologist Helen Fisher’s book Why Him, Why Her? — a book which claims there are personality types — I thought, “Well here’s another form of astrology.” I won’t say I hate astrology; those daily things suck, but the general overviews are slightly informative. Then there’s Chinese astrology etc. So maybe these are some basic bits of information on personality, but what about personal experiences? I know far more women who are happily married to ‘men just like their dads’ then perfect astrology matches.

But after hearing of the research and science behind, I’m more intrigued…

I don’t think we are any more trapped by biology than we are the stars or family patterns. However, I think I want to check out this book and see if it is perhaps yet another layer — another framework among several. And when you lay each over the other, you end up with a complicated, yet far more accurate image of how we seek , who we find, and what we end up with.

Part of the television program also included being ‘damaged’ or insecure regarding relationships based on former experiences, opting to show professional matchmakers as a means to find love, or at least meet people. It wasn’t very helpful as far as remedies to your fragile belief in dating & relationships, but there was something very informative in this segment. The matchmaker said, “Many people say they want love, but aren’t ready for love.” I found that to be the most important part of that segment. It was too bad that 20/20 edited it to look as if the matchmaker was defensively using this as an excuse for not having perfect performance.

On the flip side, 20/20 erred in the next segment their aired. It was on arranged marriages, and rather than focusing on the wisdom provided by the expert who mentioned that a huge key in the success of Indian arranged marriages was the ceremony which clearly put an emphasis on the investment of both the bride & groom’s families and their communities to make such marriages work; 20/20 ended the segment with the small percentage rate of divorces in India, leaving out the plethora of cultural differences which can also account for such disparity. Leaving that as the last word, rather than the insight into total family & community commitment to the couple’s success, left me lingering on more negative, less helpful facts.

Second to that, were the damning statements about love as depicted in song and film (something covered in that study I’m participating in).

Ah, so at the end, the expert, Helen Fisher, does agree with me that love & romance are far more complicated than it sounded at the beginning. *wink*

I’m off to take the questionnaire to see “what I am” — and I think I’ll make the husband do it to. Then I’ll have more to say.

Neither A Poser Nor A Cosmo Reader Be

If you trust Cosmoand by now you shouldn’t — let me tell you to utterly ignore their “fun & fearless” advice to meet a new guy at a Super Bowl party.

Not only will you be hated for being a football-wanna-be (the reason most real football fans watch the game at home) but you’re dooming yourself to either A) a relationship life in which you must continue to watch football and other sports you don’t like or B) be found out for the poser you are; neither of which is a good thing.

If you really do give a hoot about the Super Bowl, you’d be going already and wouldn’t need Cosmo to tell you it’s a good idea to put on a team-logoed shirt and stand near a similarly dressed male.