The Great Mate Debate

Topic: What advice would you give a friend looking to find love in 2008?
Posted by: Amy Spencer

I see your point, Evan. Aly's advice that singles should "stop trying" in dating seems, as she admits, very defeatist. It's the equivalent of "Just wait by the phone for a man to call," which we girls have learned to stop doing long ago (at least I hope we have, right girls?).

But I think there is a line here. The way I see it, "trying" is one thing. And that's what you're talking about, Evan: Going online to find love. Asking to be set up. Giving a guy a second chance even when there wasn't chemistry the first time. If what you want is love, then I say sure, try anything.

But then there's trying too hard, and that's another thing entirely. I know, because I've been the girl that tried too hard, though I didn't know it at the time. I cringe when I think about the guys I pushed to like me, the dates I pushed to happen, the parties I waded through in desperation, asking everyone, "Is anyone single here? Have you seen any cute guys?" I remember once hounding my sister once to arrange a set-up with the brother of a friend of hers who was mentioned to me in passing. (Can you follow that?) I'd call my sister every day asking, "Did you talk to R about her brother yet? Have you heard anything? Can you make it happen? Three weeks later, the brother finally told R, who told my sister, who told me: "He said 'I hear she's a brunette. I don't date brunettes..."

God, I felt like a fool. Not only was I trying too hard, but I doing it for some jerk-off (can I say that on here? Trust me, I want to say worse!). The point is, that experience was not good for my self-esteem. I felt like a desperate single woman "on the prowl" just like Aly's friend, willing to do anything to find a partner. Persistence seems to work with everything else in life, I thought, so why not with love?

Well, because love can't be earned by hours worked or effort repaid. Finding love is, unfortunately, one of those things we can't force or control. I guess agree with both Evan and Aly: Try, definitely. But if you feel yourself trying too hard—and by that I mean feeling desperate, turning ugly, feeling down on yourself, hating the search for love—then stop! Please, for your own sake. Stop the cycle that I was in and that Aly's friend is in now, and focus on other things for a minute. You can try again later! The watched pot never boils, and a depressingly-stared-and-glared-at love life won't heat up either.

Yeah, it sounds unhelpful to suggest sitting back and resting. But sometimes, for your own sanity, you need to! Pick one of the other 135 facets of your life that make you who you are, other than dating—friends, exercise, reading, writing, dancing, cooking, walking, eating—and focus on that for a minute. And who knows, you may end up being one of those people who (like me) end up saying, "It's so funny, the minute I stopped trying..." and "It was just when I least expected it..." Remember, clichés become clichés because there's truth in there.

Topic: What advice would you give a friend who is looking to find love in 2008?
Posted by: Amy Spencer

When I was looking for love in 2007, a lot of people (and books and Dr. Phil episodes) told me: Love yourself. Because you have to love yourself before you can love someone else. All true of course. But I found that hard to gauge in the same way "Stop eating when you're starting to feel full" is. Me, I don't feel full until my plate is empty, and with no way to measure self-contentment, how do I know if I love myself enough?

What was easier to do, I realized, was to start loving my life. That I could do in an active, measurable way. Instead of going for drinks in desperation with any stranger I met (I mean, how many glasses of rosé can one girl drink?), I began to spend more time with my friends and my family who I loved. I went for lingering brunches and inhaled my freedom. I walked for hours around the city appreciating my health, my home, my apartment, my job and everything else I had going for me. And because I didn't have a husband and kids (though I wanted both), I traveled more than ever, and felt even better about my life when I was out exploring the world. And the more I appreciated my life, the happier and more fulfilled I felt. And the happier and more fulfilled I felt, the more I glowed. And the more I glowed, the more confident I was. And the more confident I was, well...that's when the men came flocking. Yes, I had plenty of down days (my God!) But I had far more happy ones, and I'm grateful now that I made sure to have them.

So I suggest the same to someone looking for love in 2008: Love every single second you have—and I mean that literally. Think about it: If all goes according to hope and plan and you DO meet someone and fall in love, won't you wish you didn't waste these weeks or months of singleness you had left? If a crystal ball could tell you that you are going to meet someone in three months, aren't there a few things you might want to do with the commitment-free single nights you have left? (Like, I don't know, make out with a hot bartender you see absolutely no future with, just because you can?)

While you search for a partner, try not to bog yourself down with must-do dating rules and depressing thoughts and so many dates you forget who you are and what you're looking for in the first place. Look for love, of course, but while you're doing it, live and love the life you have now. The more you do, the more likely it is that love will come flocking to you to find out your secret.

Posted by: Amy Spencer
Topic: A recent study says that we can correctly figure out what a stranger is thinking 20% of the time…and what a romantic partner is thinking 35% of the time. In your opinion, what does that indicate about how well we know our mates?

You know what's funny about this? The first thing I thought of when I saw those numbers was how little we actually know our partners. In my eyes, 35% is nothing in the grand scheme of things!

In my life, I get a kick out of it when my husband can figure out what I'm thinking (Granted, it's often, "What, do you want to get an In and Out burger?"). But I find that when I'm on a roll with a few of those, "Ah, I know my husband so well" moments, I can get a little cocky about it. That's when I stop asking—and start assuming—what he wants. And we know what happens when you assume... I screw up on some guess or assumption, and I'm then left wondering, "Do I really know my guy at all?"

I imagine those percentages go up the longer you're with a partner. But personally, I'm going to take it as a reminder that my husband is still 65% mystery to me. So from now on, I'll leave the mind reading and "trying to figure out" options at the door when I can, and stick to the good old-fashioned tactics: verbalized conversation and communication, guaranteed to have a much higher success rate!

Topic: What’s the best thing about being single during the holidays…and the best thing about being coupled up over the holidays?
Posted by: Amy Spencer

I didn't get a chance to list my three favorite things about being single, so I'm going to combine it here. Here's what's great about being single, holidays or not:

1) The world is your oyster. When I was single, my sister had a job that flew her around the world, and when she’d call and say, “Meet me in France,” I could. And I did. I jumped around like a fugitive. In fact, my single friend Yvonne is in Paris now celebrating her birthday. She said she might extend her trip and head to Milan for a few days afterward. Or maybe Amsterdam. Or maybe not. But the point is: she can do whatever she wants over the holidays...no extended family shopping required.

2) First kisses.—and these are the very best during the holidays. In fact, I think office Christmas parties are made for single people. Singles are the ones who get to drink too much punch and make out with coworkers and go dancing afterward. And think about the hope of New Year's Eve, the night of twinkling party lights and possibility...I don't know, for me? I'm a sucker for the hope of magic at midnight on New Year's Eve.

3) The absolute uncertainty of the future. When you're single, your future is like a Christmas present: You may not know what's in there, but wondering what's in that box is half the fun! Your life can change entirely when you become a twosome. Will you meet someone in your hometown? In another country? Will you meet a writer, a designer, a musician, a businessperson – what will your life be like? When I was single, I loved not knowing. So shake that Christmas present all you want, and enjoy the thrill of dreaming about what's inside.

And since this is my first holiday as a married gal, I'll tell you my favorite things about being coupled:
1) Snuggling under a blanket and complimenting ourselves about our cute Christmas tree.
2) Singing corny carols in the car on the way to the grocery store for comfort food.
3) And eating like it's going out of style, because my husband says just the right thing about it: He likes me better with a few holiday pounds on me. "More to love," he says. Right on! Pass the mashed...

Posted by: Amy Spencer
Topic: Do you think you can really and truly “feel” chemistry via email?

In my earlier post about this topic, I very quickly said I didn't buy it, that it was a no-go. I'm re-thinking this. Here's why:

I told a friend of mine about this the other day, how I once had an intense email flirtation from a guy I had yet to meet.

"Over email," I explained, "I would get butterflies in my stomach when I saw he had emailed me; I would find myself smiling and blushing on my end of the keyboard; I'd get nervous before I wrote back; I would get a rush after I pressed send." Then I told her that when we met later, it was a big letdown. "It turned out there wasn't actually any chemistry there. I had just been fooled into thinking there was."

"But wait," she said, "Whether it lasts or not isn't the point. The point is that the butterflies, the rush, the blush, the nervousness, that's the chemistry.

She had a great point. Just because chemistry doesn't lead to a long-lasting love doesn't mean it wasn't there. I remember one guy I had a crush on in college from the day I first met him in person; he made me feel butterflies for years. When we finally went out after graduation, that rush of passion lasted until the end of our appetizers, when he started talking about how much money he made, and how smart he was, and how much he worked out, and how dumb his peers were compared to him, etc. Man, those twittering wings stopped dead in my stomach for good.

He was someone I felt chemistry with in person, yet when I got to know him more, those feelings fizzled. Really, isn't it just another version of what can happen when you find yourself attracted to someone by email? First, you feel some chemistry, and then sometimes the feelings fizzle.

So I think I feel differently now. Feeling chemistry doesn't mean it's a two-way street, or that it's going to last forever. Chemistry is the feeling itself, your body reacting to some sort of attraction to another person. And if you happen to feel it by connecting over email to a person's writing and the way their mind thinks? Well, maybe that counts, too.

Posted by: Amy Spencer
Topic: Do you think you can really and truly "feel" chemistry via email?

I've got a short answer for this one: Nope.

Just know that I'm talking specifically about meeting and getting to know someone by email, not about emailing someone you've already felt chemistry with in person. I say this as someone who used to go on lots and lots and lots of online dates. Some were great, some were lame, but what I learned was that the level of chemistry I thought we had on email prior to meeting had virtually nothing in common with the chemistry I felt with them in person.

God, I remember one guy I bantered with for weeks until all hours of the night. We talked like we were in love already, and I was giddy about the late-night conversations I imagined we'd spend our lives having, you know, once we met. And then...we met. What did I feel? Nothing. Nada. In person, we were like two awkward strangers in an elevator that two five-hour dates did nothing to spark.

This is not to say that online dating doesn't work—because it absolutely does. I've seen it work. I have three close friends who married their online mates, and more friends who are relationships with guys they met online. But the way I see it, the emails you share with someone aren't about discovering chemistry, but about making sure your potential dates are at least compatible, and on a similar wavelength. A girl who wants a literary, wine-loving type will find out pretty quickly over email that a potential date prefers Playboy, hockey games and Hooters. Email is a perfect fact-finding tool. But it won't, in my opinion, dig up real chemistry.

It makes me think of Macolm Gladwell's book Blink, and how we don't give our brains enough credit for how receptive and hard-working they really are. Our brains can pick up so much from that instant, 5-second meeting in person that reflects decades of what we know we want or don't want. Sure, it picks up on someone's looks. But it's also about their voice. Their posture. The way they walk. The way they move their hands. The way they laugh. The way they smile, or ask questions or put their hand on your back as you walk through a doorway. I think all these teeny, tiny, little things are like the 0's and 1's in a computer formula for our brains—they're the things that add up to whether we feel there is chemistry there or not. And I think it works best in person.

Email is a fantastic way to find someone you're compatible with. And who knows, that same person may turn out to be someone you feel chemistry with as well. But don't make the mistake I did: Don't confuse email compatibility for real chemistry. Don't spend weeks building up your dates before you meet them in person (and, um, telling all your friends you think you've meet The One because he writes the funniest little haikus...), because you're always going to fill in a question marks left over after email by assuming you'll have fire-hot, smokin' chemistry.

If you like 'em on email, make a date, the sooner the better, before you have a chance to analyze it too much. Then you can discover all those fun question marks in person and let chemistry do its thing the best way—i.e. the human, uncomputerized way— it knows how.

Topic: What three things do you think are vital to an amazing relationship?
Posted by: Amy Spencer

It's funny how hard it is to talk about love and feelings sometimes without sounding like a totally lame cliché. Because when my new husband and I end up talking about what makes us work, words like "respect" and "appreciation" and "trust" come up a lot. So does "great communication." And of course "love"—a word that encompasses so much it ends up getting USED too much, and starts reading about as important as the word "doorknob." But looking at those words doesn't add up to the amazing relationship I know we have. Here's my best attempt at what does:

1. Fun!
2. An easiness
3. Intimacy

Fun! Granted, I'm a newlywed, but when I'm with my husband, we're usually having a great time. Maybe we're riding our bikes or playing paddle tennis (my new obsession!), which has made me a believer that "a couple who plays together stays together." Or maybe we're having a nice long talk or sharing funny stories on a long drive. Or maybe we're having fun making out or have sex or plotting a fun new way to. Really, I have so much fun with my husband, I can't imagine someone I'd rather spend my time with.

An easiness. Lindley talked about "being able to be yourself," and I agree wholeheartedly. The connection we have is EASY. I'm myself. He's himself. And to put it plainly, we get along really, really well. It's like our couple joints have ball bearings in them, so our day-to-day relationship runs effortlessly. I know, I know...relationships get hard eventually. But without that calmness before the storm, how the heck are you going to survive it?

Intimacy. I'm with Vix and Evan on this one. I think sex is vital to an amazing relationship. For proof, I just remind myself of my friendship with my gay friend Todd. He and I have fun, and we get along like peanut butter and chocolate. But we definitely don't have sex and never will. It's a great friendship, but it isn't and can never be an amazing relationship without the sex. Sex in a committed relationship is the one thing you save for the two of you alone—it's like your team uniform, the ONE thing that only the two of you have. And with great sex, over time, comes an intimacy, trust and deep, deep love.

When I was dating, some friends of mine used to say I was "too picky." The way I saw it, I was just holding out for for someone who would help me hit all three things on my list. And thank God I did. Whether it's my list or yours, amazing is SO worth waiting for.

Posted by: Amy Spencer
Topic: Why do men hate it when women ask, “What are you thinking…?”

Ah, the "What are you thinking?" cliché. Sherry makes a good point about the potential sexism of it: It's one of those things that ends up in every comic's male/female joke repertoire at least once, along with the "Why do girls go to the bathroom in groups?" But then again, I think women are more likely to ask "What are you thinking?" and we do go to the bathroom in groups. Sigh. It's a cliché because it's true. No matter how much we want to equalize the sexes, for me it always comes back to the fact that men and women are just plain different.

In the case of "What are you thinking?" I asked my husband what he's never liked about the question. He gave the simple answer, "We don't like it because we're probably thinking something we don't want to say. And now you're making us say it."

A-ha. He's hit on something: That men probably are thinking something they don't want to say. That's because we women don't ask the "What are you thinking" question randomly. Duh. We ask it when they seem quiet and lost in thought, when their eyes are focusing on some invisible weight in the air, when we sense some delve into his experience of the relationship we don't know about. But like most men who are masters of the black & white: If he wanted to say it, he'd SAY it. And if he's not saying it, it's because he DOESN'T want to. So who are we to intrude on the line between thoughts and words we all have a right to keep? In fact, for couples that share every meal and, for some, even bathroom time with each other, thoughts are the one private area we have left.

Personally, I've gotten so many depressing answers from the dang question over the years, I don't ask it much anymore. If I really think there's something spinning in there that I ought to be in on, my new angle is, "If there's something you want to talk about, you let me know, okay?" And then I let nature's male default kick in: If he wants to say it, he says it. But it's his thought, so it shouldn't be my decision to make.

I think Lindley's idea is a brilliant one: Before you ask the question, examine yourself. Find out WHY you're so itching to know. Because it's a 50/50 gamble. Sure his answer might be something that opens an important line of communication you should be talking about, which is good. Or...it might be a passing fear or a stroll through some emotional window-shopping that you really don't need—or want—to know.

Posted by: Amy Spencer
Topic: Why do you think so many couples split up once they are “empty nesters” – once the kids are independent?

Once again, some wise words on the topic fulfill most thoughts I had on it: Mostly that I feel raising kids can often become either the only shared goal, or a distraction from the fact that a couple's personality doesn't mesh like it did 25 years earlier. And when the kids go, a couple who no longer has much in common says, "Huh. Now what?"

But here's another interesting thought I had. (Well, I guess you be the judge of whether or not it's interesting!) In my grandmother's generation, lots of couples didn't split up after the kids left, even if they lived two separate lives at home. They'd have separate beds, take separate vacations, participate in separate hobbies, and—without kids to look after—do very little together other than watch the same television show at night.

But then, that was the "stick around" era. It was a time when people stuck around in the same corporations for 40 years. When couples wouldn't hear of divorce. Parents then, watched their kids leave the nest to take on the same kinds of long-term jobs and long-term relationships they did.

Now? Well, now we're in the "me" era. Now, parents watch their kids putting off college to travel. Living at home for a many years after college to save money, or to put off taking on responsibilities and rent. Waiting to marry until they find the perfect soul mate. Putting off kids until their late 30s so they can live it up as solo adults for as long as possible before being tied down. Since this is what empty nesters are watching now, it's no wonder to me that when their kids leave the nest, some of them ask, "Why not me, too? Why can't I take advantage of the 'me' era?"

Some couples, like Vix's parents, choose to take on another focus as a couple, using the "two feet" Helen was talking about. But not every couple wants to. Some might be relieved they don't have to spend as much time together raising the kids. And they might just think, "Hey, I never got to live it up as a solo adult, and it's about time I did."

So maybe that's part of it, too: Maybe the "me" era the GenXers have mastered is really rubbing off?

Posted by: Amy Spencer
Topic: Is there anything wrong with a person in a committed relationship having a crush on someone else…as long as it isn’t acted upon? Can it even benefit a relationship?

Wow, I’m in some seriously smart company here, I must say. My fellow bloggers have hit on every point that occurred to me on this topic, and about five that didn’t! Kudos to you all.

I’m a newlywed. So my first thought in asking if a “crush” is okay and possibly beneficial was “No! Absolutely not!” I feel I’ve found my perfect fit, so I don’t even want to THINK about thinking about someone else. If I’ve found the very best, why settle for second? But then Lindley and Evan wisely pointed out how noticing or checking people out is basically human nature, and it would be freakish not to have the “noticing” gene. And, well, I have to agree with that, too.

Still, since this is about taking a stance, I’ll take one. My vote is that having a crush is not healthy. I won't call it "wrong," but like Evan and Dr. Helen say, it’s a slippery slope. In fact, I’m going to go so far as to say I think even those Friends-like “lists” can be a slippery slope, too. I’ve seen it happen with couples more than a few times: If you make enough “jokes” about wanting to have sex with celebrities, or “jokes” about being attracted to the hot bartender, or “jokes” about wanting to divorce each other over trifling situations, those “jokes,” over time, get more intense, start feeling more serious, and can slowly eat away at the loving connection you started with.

Don’t get me wrong, I think it’s hilarious to share what celebrities you think are hot (my husband still holds a torch for his very first crush, Elvira). But we don’t joke that we get a free pass to be with them, should the situation arise. Call me a prima donna for it, but I feel that the minute it becomes okay to "joke" about having sex with other people you find attractive, the minute your brain opens a door to actually finding people other than your partner attractive. It just points you in the direction of the slope.

To me, the slope of the crush gets slippery the minute you feel yourself feeling something—namely, those chemicals Dr. Helen brought up. Only you know who brings out the blush in you, that rush of attraction. And when you feel it, I think you’re treading on dangerous ground and it's time to retreat.

I agree that having a crush doesn’t signify a hole or problem in your relationship. But I think if you do find yourself blushing and rushing for someone—maybe looking forward to seeing them at work in ways you never used to, or dolling up more than normal when you’ll see your crush—you should nip it in the bud before those feelings turn into something you have to worry about. Don’t make it harder for yourself. It’s a little like cancer: You catch the crush early and you can flick it away like a mole. But if you let it grow into something bigger, it can seep into your thoughts and affect your relationship with your partner.

So on second thought, maybe I do think there’s a benefit to a crush. A crush is a beacon that blinks, “Wait, don’t go there! Time to check in at home!” Feeling a blush and rush for someone else is a sign you should re-focus on the one you love more deeply. It’s like Lindley said: It may be natural to have an initial moment of crushing, but if it feels strange and unnatural because it’s not your partner, listen to it. Nip it, stop it, block it. Go home and look at your partner. Appreciate what made you feel the rush about them in the beginning, too.