Are you a guy who uses the services of an online dating site to land chicks? Are you a cheap bastard who uses the free ones, like OKCupid? Are you an idiot who approaches women with the subtlety of a muscle car that’s missing its catalytic converter? If so, you may soon be featured on my latest interview subject’s website, A(n)nals of Online Dating. Whenever someone sends a message that’s creepy, of the canned “PUA” variety, or both, not only does Satan touch himself a little and start clearing space, but there’s a good chance it’ll end up here. I spoke with the proprietor about why guys can’t get through their heads the idea that talking about their genitals is not an effective romantic strategy.
IL: Any theories as to why that is? I mean, in my experience, it’s the men who have to do most of the blind initial messaging, so maybe it’s a law-of-averages thing — with so many messages, some are bound to be creepy.
OB: I think it probably is part a law-of-averages thing and part a cultural thing. Despite increased gender equality, it’s still expected that men do the asking out and the leading when it comes to dating. So men pick who they want to date, and women either accept or reject. And online that’s magnified because you have so many people to choose from and none of the visual cues that help you to differentiate between creeps and not-creeps in the real world.
So you have a lot of guys who are trying really hard to set themselves apart and end up coming off as really weird or creepy, like guys who use pickup-artist techniques online. And then you have guys who say or do things online that they would never do face-to-face, because it would be too awkward— like initiating a conversation with “I would love to put my tongue in your ass.”
I’ll say this much, you have to appreciate the guy who casually tosses out an offer to put his tongue in a girl’s ass as his official online handshake. Is it efficient? Not at all, but he’s casting a wide net. Next time you’re talking to a friend or coworker who’s a little too pleased with himself and whose breath smells a little “off”, congratulations, because you’re looking at proof of concept personified.
Celebrities are well-known for being among the most intelligent and politically acute members of society. Why, if we didn’t have Lindsay Lohan to help guide our voting conscience, where would we be? Thankfully, Kelly Clarkson’s here to further enlighten us. Via Pegasus News:
During the European leg of her tour, the singer toldThe Daily Star: “I’ve been reading online about the debates and I’m probably going to vote for Obama again, even though I’m a Republican at heart.”
Kelly added: “I can’t support Romney’s policies as I have a lot of gay friends and I don’t think it’s fair they can’t get married. I’m not a hardcore feminist but we can’t be going back to the ’50s.”
To be clear, this doesn’t bother me because of the gay thing. Ignoring the fact that “I have a lot of gay friends” is the 21st-century equivalent of “I’m not racist, I have friends who are black”, I think everyone these days have loved ones who are gay, be they friends, family, or their own gay significant other. Gays marrying has no bearing whatsoever on the legitimacy of my own marriage, so what’s it to me if they get married? No, the first thing about this that bothers me is the fundamental lack of understanding of what the fuck exactly it is the president does. Is, or even can, Mitt Romney going to take office and forever deny our gay friends they ability to marry? No, he cannot. No president can. Is Barack Obama, if reelected, able to magically wave his hands and grant marital privileges to all? Again, no. It is, at this juncture, a states rights issue, just like every other marriage-related issue. The only involvement the president could have is with DOMA, either signing it into law or vetoing it’s passage should it ever get to that. And if that does happen, don’t blame/thank the president. Blame/thank the fucking legislature.
The second infuriating thing about this is that it’s another case of a public figure who’s wealthy enough to have the luxury of voting entirely on the basis of social issues. People love to say “I can’t afford to be a liberal”, but that’s almost criminally off-base. There are plenty of people on the right who are well-off enough to base their voting decisions on what Jesus thinks a woman should be allowed to do with her vagina. In either case, I can’t hate on the person’s success. But I don’t have a job and am way more interested in the fiscal issues, so I would appreciate at least an attempt at having some perspective. I understand that most of your fanbase is liberal because they’re young/conservative because they’re religious, but before you shoot off your fat mouth maybe try to give your decisions the same consideration the rest of us do.
Let’s put an end to universal suffrage. Deny celebrities the right to vote.