Sexless in the City

Sometimes reading romance novels doesn’t quite prepare you for a love life...

For this 30-year-old urbanite, love is always a misadventure: The Harvard Lickwit, Hippie the Groper, the 5% Man, and the Ad Weasel. These and many other men wander in and out of her life — but never her bed.

Friday, July 15, 2005

That mysterious man who poo-poohed you

Wednesday’s post so overheated me, I neglected to answer a probing reader query! You see, the aforementioned swoon notwithstanding, I’ve actually tried to get sterner in my dealings with men. Indeed, many first-time male-reader respondents to this blog have been greeted with a rather starchy email:
Dear Reader-with-Testosterone:

Thank you for your email. I have been advised by my love-life counsel to exercise caution in responding to emails from my male fan-base, so this will be brief. [1-2 sentence personalized response follows]

Cheers, <--- note substitution for once-standard “xoxo”
But when the ever-inquisitive Still Waiting received this missive, it raised some questions for him.
When I got your email that said your love council has advised you against your male fanbase or something like that it got me wondering. And sometimes I wonder, dont get me wrong, does your blog have very few male readers? Because thats what I got from your email, otherwise it would have seemed strange to single me out in an email like that.
Oh no, dahling! Au contraire! At least as far as emailing readers go, the men vastly outnumber the women. I imagine it makes for a rather safe form of e-flirting. ;) But you see, it is precisely on the basis of such a likely motivation that my love-life counsel advised against too-prompt, too-lengthy or otherwise too-encouraging replies. Or so I assume. What other reason could he have for discouraging me from rapport with male readers?
And I was pleased as punch to be at the top of your blog for one day, don’t get me wrong.

and who is this mysterious love council anyway?
Just some advisor, really. I’d say a panel, but it is only a panel of one at this point. Not that this makes the advice any less valuable or any more biased ... But it’s my love-life counsel, dahling, love-life. Surely you can’t think a piner such as I should need advice on loving! Oh no. Don’t you mistake my, er, uh ... selective experience in some of its manifestations as an ignorance of love in general. I’ve done my romantic Kegels; I’m quite sure my heart is well-trained in the matters of love. :)

But seeing as how a love-life implies interaction — and I’m not sure how expert and experienced in the pine may be my potential correspondents — I found it advisable to consult my, well, counsel. Who by dint of certain experiences seemed able to sketch a likely profile of readers such as yourself. Or at least to suggest shrewd responses on my part.

By the way, can I mention how use of the word “correspondent” is making me giggle these days? Monday night being my birthday, and my bank-account balance being low, friends and I chose to convene in an inexpensive fashion. Happily enough, the city provides many freebies for cheapskates such as myself. Freebies like the movie showings at Bryant Park (scene of my infamous interview, but I digress). Which Monday night consisted of the Fred Astaire/Ginger Rogers classic The Gay Divorcee.

Lest you be confused, the word is used in the antiquated sense of the word, though from the canoodling male threesome who sat in front of us, you’d be hard-pressed to make this distinction (say, if you’d been drinking much wine in your picnic on the grass). Anyhow, the script is retains its cleverness, revolving as it does around a woman’s attempts to escape her unhappy marriage. In those days, it seems, spousal unfaithfulness was the most-accepted premise for divorce. Hence women would hire men known as “co-respondents” (emphasis on the first syllable) who’d conveniently be caught with them in compromising embrace. Really a rather racy film for its time of release, but still funny as I said. Although what I said wasn’t originally on the topic of old movies, was it ... Oh yes! Your query. But of course. I must still be feeling the effects of that mid-week coffee-shop swoon.
and what else do they vote on?
- still waiting.
Vote on, vote on. Well let me see ... There’s not so much a vote as there is a pronouncement — seeing as how my counsel will always be in agreement with himself ... I assume. But he has pronounced upon my questionable use of “mysogyny,” for one thing, and whether or not my no-dating policy means I can still have coffee with a mostly unknown Jesus freak. So far that is about the extent of his advice, but really as an independent woman I may need move beyond such a counselee/counsel relationship. Ah, but who knows? The week may present a new love-life conundrum ... or even an addition to the counsel!

Thanks as ever for your inquiry ...