Who put the ‘i’ in naive?

Yeah. So ... tonight I got this email from Geezer #2. Believe it or not, his use of caps lock actually extends to paper-based communications (which I can verify based on a letter that arrived today, including various enclosures printed on what appears to be old-school fax paper — the kind that comes on a roll, you know).

HI ANNA,

WOULD YOU HAVE TIME TO MEET FOR LUNCH AT THE HOME RESTAURANT [Anna reports: absolutely dreadful “Chinese” restaurant in E. Chelsea] ON SATURDAY (CIRCA 12-1 PM) AND THEN A MOVIE?. YOU NEED TO GET OUT AND RELAX. WE MAY STOP AT MY 23 RD STREET OFFICE FOR DOCUMENTS I NEED. .

EXCEPT FOR TWO POLITICAL TRIPS, MY TRAVEL SCHEDULE LOOKS GOOD FOR SEPTEMBER AND OCTOBER.BUT,I HAVE A LOT TO DO WITH MY ONGOING VENTURES HERE IN THE CITY. SENT A NOTE TO HILLARY VIA HER SECRETARY RE BILL CLINTON’S SITUATION. LET ME KNOW IF YOU ARE OPEN TO THE INVITATION.
YOUR FRIEND AND ADVISOR,
GEEZER #2, THE WORK DADDY

... Should I be worried that semi-hysterical laughter seems to be bubbling up inside?!

I’m sure he’s just a lonely, aging widower ... but man. How do I find these guys?!

On the bright side, this may be the most-effective goad I’ve had yet to redouble efforts on my job search. For which reason, by the way, today’s entry comes so late.

There is, however, no good excuse for not bringing you the latest Spooning Fork, so have no fear, I’ll be bringing you my write-up of Tom Jones very soon. Don’t forget you can also enter the September contest ... and if you still don’t like the name of Spooning Fork (I can’t say I much care for it) suggest an alternate! Winner gets a j-peg of Anna, as promised.

And as for other site features ...
I feel it only fair to give you another taste of the Sexless in the City book club selection: Taking Sex Differences Seriously (hey, I also own a copy of Solitary Sex, a cultural history of masturbation; key your eye on this section, as it may get more interesting yet).

TSDS quote for the day:

One interesting experiment made members of each sex sit through the other’s sexual turn-ons. Scientists read to college students stories that combined romance with steamy sex. When the students were asked what they remembered, “women recalled lines such as ‘They looked deeply into each others’ eyes.’ Men, on the other hand, accurately recited lines such as: ‘She clutched his back and wrapped her legs around him.’” (Rhoads, p. 52, quoting Deborah Blum, Sex on the Brain (1997), p. 230)

Scientists reading romance novels ... doncha love that image? I can just hear the dinner-table conversation that night: “So, what did you do at work tonight, honey?” “Um ... Um ...”

I wonder, however, to what degree the women in the study were reluctant to admit that they might have recalled steamier details — especially if the scientist was a man. We definitely are socialized against crass conversation; one of my grandmothers objects when I say “crap”! And that’s nothing compared to the controversial c-word in Boys on the Side (an early Matthew McConaughey role, by the way). Rhoads would probably respond that women with higher testosterone might be more inclined to remember the steamy details. On high-testosterone women, Rhoads says:

A 1985 study found that the women with high testosterone were full of confidence and energy (and perhaps full of themselves) ... These women saw themselves as impulsive but also robust, resourceful, sharp-witted and enterprising.

The upside, men: women with high amounts of “testosterone and other masculinizing hormones” are “the most interested in casual sex” (according to one study Rhoads cites, p. 31). The downside: such women are also “more likely to be balding, but with large amounts of body hair, and to have high blood pressure” (Rhoads, p. 32). H-h-h-hot.

Buy-the-Buy

Taking Sex Differences Seriously

Solitary Sex

Sex on the Brain