Random Friday #27

Selective Technophile
The other day, I was looking at my blog (to answer comments), and blogger sort of hiccupped and gave me my blog feed instead. I have not ever seen the feed, and I was a bit surprised. I had heard about feeds for websites that have data that is updated frequently. I am a selective technophile; I understand some technology and don't know much about other things. I can blog and write a few things in HTLM. But I don't do the feed thing. Don't really know about it.

Videos
I have been entertained recently by ~Deb's videos. I mean, she videos Sunday fun, talking about a good porn plot, and my favorite, them just goofing around tp make a music video. Deb is incredibly gifted (has quite an expressive mind). But I sometimes wonder if video editing software is allowing people with smaller budgets and less technology to enter the fray. I would imagine this takes hours and hours to do. I don't have the patience for this, but I am glad that some (~Deb) do. And there are probably a bunch on YouTube that I wish lacked the skill to upload vids, but that is something else.

Academy Awards
I missed the Academy Awards this year, and you know, my life did not change. I did watch omovies summary, and I think I got caught up. I have not been to see an award-nominated movie in quite some time (I did not see Batman because it looked too violent). Don't get me wrong, I like artsy films. But I guess I am more used to a film being in a foreign language to make it artsy.

Blue Juice
I listened to part of Blue Juice, a really bad 1995 movie starring Sean Pertwee as JC, a twenty-something surfer, who is more of a surfer kid than an adult. The best part of the movie is in the first scene, where you see JC with full frontal nudity. Well, there is a strategically placed sock that keeps the movie at an R rating. Catherine Zeta-Jones plays Chloe, his girlfriend. Chole's best line, "Are you telling a woman with a pan of burning fat in her hand that she doesn't know what she is doing?" The film is set in Australia, and I wonder if Catherine Zeta-Jones has a good Australian accent. I have no idea, actually, because I have not been down under.

Anyway, I think if a movie is free on the web (and there is no copyright infringement), I can almost guess that it is old or it is crappy. This one is sort of crappy. There are touching points (about the one hour point, where they talk into a "lie detector blow hole"), but it is normally a bit flat. Or does it go from charming to flat, a bit uneven for a film.

Oh, and is it just me, or could you even imagine Catherine Zeta-Jones being Sean Connery's love interest in Entrapment. He is so sexy, but I just don't see the two of them together.

RPI and Basketball
The RPI (Rating Percentage Index) is a measure of strength of schedule and how a team does against that schedule. Created in 1981, the RPI is a tool used in selecting and seeding the 65 teams for the NCAA Men's basketball Division I tournament. This sentence is taken directly from its definition. But when I looked at the numbers, Tennessee had a #1 strength of schedule. Tennessee plays in the SEC, and according to everyone, they suck this year. Okay, this is by someone who pulls for Georgia Tech. Anyway, how can Tennessee be #1 in SOS when they play in a conference that sucks? I don't know too much about men's basketball, but this makes no sense to me.

Carpe Diem
"If you had one shot, one opportunity to seize everything you wanted. Would you capture it, or just let it slip away?" I heard these lines, or similarities to them, recently on a television program. Okay, I admit it, the lines are a bit lame. I think they were written that way on purpose. But you know, for most of us, I think we let these moments slip away. Sort of sad, really.

Flixter
Flixster.com is a new-ish site. I wonder why they are not being sued by Flicker. Or Twitter. Or both.

Movies
Is it just around here, or do the movie theaters seem more crowded? I want to watch A Powerful Noise but there is some stink associated with the phrase "town hall meeting." Whenever I hear that, I think, "A meeting where we all bitch and agree with one another but nothing gets done." March 6 is when Watchmen premiers. Oh, and that is Malin Akerman on the movie poster. Not sure who she is, but I think people will go just to see her in spandex.


Tagged
I don't like doing memes, and tags are just sort of memes. But since I sort of poked at Ian earlier in the week, he tagged me. Instead of just forgetting, I am going to list 10 sites with attitude. Because I have a bit of 'tude myself, I am not going to follow through with the entire request, telling them that they have an award.

Anyway, here are the rules, some of which I will not be following:

Rules for the award:

1. Put the logo on your blog or post.

2. Nominate at least 10 blogs, which show great Attitude and/or Gratitude!

3. Be sure to link to your nominees within your post.

4. Let them know that they have received this award by commenting on their blog.

5. Nominate your favorites and link to this post.

Here are my nominations, in a particular order, the result of an algorithm that involves numerology, metaphysics and Ti Chi:

1. Let Me Go On and On. Okay, my very own lesbian crush.
2. Grantochrist. If you ignore the J-bunnies, a really funny read.
3. Cup 'o Joe. The only HR person you will ever like.
4. SSC. Joe's main squeeze.
5. Heart of a Family. A day in the life of a super Mom with a child with special needs.
6. Xmichra. 'Nuff said. Don't want to make Deb jealous.
7. Dr. Deb. Always engaging.
8. Mal's Mumblings. One smart cookie.
9. Saur. I don't read her often, but a good blog with good 'tude.
10. A Tail of Two Towns. If you get jealous easily, skip this one. He lives in paradise.

Oh, and if I didn't list you? Maybe that is because I like you more. Did I mention I don't like tags and memes?

Blink, Speed Dating, and Delusional Marriages

The other day, I saw a video by a VLOGger I was unfamiliar with, and it was a sweet VLOG. It was a VLOG about looking for someone. My initial reaction was to post his video on my site and say, "check out Omar." But then I thought, "Most of my readers are either (1) guys or (2) lesbians. Er, not quite the pool of potential mates for a heterosexual male.

So, instead, I wrote the following response:

Crap, I wrote a great response to you, that was clever, intellectually stimulating, and well-written. Thus, YouTube ate my response.

I wanted to tell you about Blink, a book by Glaswell (I can't remember his first name, but he also wrote "The Tipping Point." It's a book about rapid cognition. When you meet someone for the first time, your mind takes about two seconds to jump to a series of conclusions. And these initial impressions are normally spot on.

Well, add in some clever things, and that is about what I said. Oh, and I did not write you to get you to read my blog.

They did not have speed dating when I was dating. I had to endure dates that you know are going badly, but you have to continue on the date. You can't just "go to the ladies room" and call a cab to get the hell out of here. Oooops. I did not mean to say that.

Well, good luck with your search. You seem sweet.

I wish I could have listed my initial response, but, you know, I was just typing in YouTube. Did I mention I hate YouTube's email interface?

Then, I pop onto ~deb's site, and she was writing about relationships as well. In it, she lets us know about a site concerning the Law of Attraction. A really interesting movie.

And it sort of reminds me of what I wanted to write about today. Well, I was going to write about it some time. Today seemed like a good enough day as any.

I read something on marriage the other day, and it resonated with me. In any field, we make assumptions which may or may not be true. For instance, in the area of relationships, sometimes we spend a lot of energy looking at failed marriages (labeling them as bad marriages) in order to see what the components of a good marriage are. If a bad marriage has two people with little in common, we reason, things in common may be essential for a good marriage. But we really can't make that jump. Thinking of this another way, let's say you have a meal that you don't like, and it has MSG in it. One could think, "MSG is bad in meals. Eliminating MSG will make for a good meal" Two fallacies: (1) perhaps MSG is important in a different meal, and without it, the meal would be less special, and (2) simply eliminating MSG does not make a meal good.

Well, part of this research was fascinating, because they found that realistic views of a marriage (something most of us would want) actually decrease the chances of having a successful marriage. The study did this by surveying couples – in good and in bad marriages (they defined good verses bad, but for sake of discussion, let's assume they got it right). In bad marriages (or divorced couples), both the man and women answered consistently about the traits of each other. That is, they both had consistent viewpoints of their spouse. But in good marriages, the man, for instance, thought better of the woman than the woman thought of herself, and visa versa. That is, they were a bit delusional.

I was a bit disturbed by these findings, at first. But it makes sense.

Think of it this way: Lets say that your spouse is bull-headed; very opinionated. Well, you can label that as bull-headed, or you can say that your spouse is "focused." One word has negative connotations, one positive. And if you feel more positive about your spouse, well, you probably treat him better, say more complimentary things, and the like.

Now some might say that you are tricking yourself into a better marriage if you do this, but you know, our thoughts and feelings are only chemical reactions in the brain anyway. And I would not mind tricking myself to a better marriage? Wouldn't you do it as well?

Valentine's Day Suggestions

Okay, I am an easy girl to impress, and I don't normally have great expectations, but Valentine's Day is a little bit different. Okay, guys, Valentine's Day is a little early this year – it falls on February 14. Why the heck can't guys remember it? When there is a lot of pink and red in the "specialty isles" of the grocery store, check it out to see if it is Valentine-related.

Musts
There are a few musts on Valentine's Day.

1. Cards. You must give your wife/girlfriend a card that you either made yourself or picked out yourself. Homemade cards are so much nicer than bought cards, but how many men are going to make a card. It scores big points, but it is not necessary to make your own card. But please, gentlemen, pick out an appropriate card. It can be funny (but please don't comment about a big ass if said Valentine has one). It can be mushy. But please don't just sign it – write a thought-out note in the card. Total cost is less than four dollars, and it is a must. If you don't get her one, she will say it is fine. She is lying to you. It is not fine.

2. Flowers. I know, the florists are making a killing on Valentine's Day, and to protest, you are boycotting your local florist. Bad move. I mean, if you are married, you figure you are just saving a few bucks and mutually, you benefit from the thriftiness. Men, did you ever notice that romance has little to do with thriftiness? Heck, romance may defy logic (sorry, Prata).

But don't just buy her flowers – have them delivered. For those romantics among you, you know why. For those "rational males", think of it this way – flowers bought in a store that you deliver yourself cost about $10 less than having them delivered. And the delivery really impacts the "value" of the gift. You are leveraging sunk costs anyway. And you know, I hate to admit it, but I love receiving flowers when other women in the office don't receive them. There is a temporary feeling of, "I married better than you did." And that feeling lasts through the night, if you know what I mean.

3. Feeling Special. And you have to do something in the evening that makes her feel special. And, ten minutes of passion on the bed does not count. This could be different for different women, so I am going to leave this point dangling.

Nice-to-Haves
Now, there are other things, some which are expected, some which are not, which are nice-to-have on Valentine's Day.

1. Dinner. You would think I would have put dinner on the must list. Sorry, but there are only so many restaurants out there, and they are so crowded on Valentine's Day. I love to get dressed up and go out, but to spend an hour or more waiting for a table sort of dampens some of the romance for the evening. My opinion only. But I do like going out on Valentine's Day. It can be a dive, but it just can't be a chain. Sorry, I am picky.

2. Poetry. You may have guessed, I am a nut for words, and poetry is so wonderful. I love listening to my hubbie read me poetry when we are close. His soothing words, my ears just drinking the poets' images. Quite wonderful.

3. Gifts. Okay, technically a card and/or flowers are gifts. But when I think of Valentine's Gifts, I think of other things. Jewelry is not really a "nice to have" unless it is a special Valentine's Day. Actually, the more I think about jewelry, this is more of an anniversary gift than a Valentine's Day gift (unless you are dating Paris Hilton). Lingerie is nice, but let's face it, half of the benefit goes to the giver. Guys, if you have a girlfriend, lingerie may not be appropriate. Even if you have been "doing it" for a while, it will remind her that when you thought of a romantic gift, you decided to give her something that is more of a sex gift than anything else. Enough said.

Okay, bottom line is that women just want to be worshiped. If you can remember that, you are golden. Remember, worship equals good.

Addendum
After thinking about the post, I thought of something else. I was assuming you are either married or seriously dating someone. That is not always the case. Here are some other random thoughts on the matter.

1. Dating a Married Woman. This is something I can't recommend, guys. She is married. And when I say dating, I am being nice. Please, please, please don't send her flowers at home or at work. And don't buy her anything that can be described as evidence. Basically, you should not be doing this, but you know, it is really not up to you to help her hubbie discover her indiscretion. Oh, and don't give her anything that can be grown in a Petri dish, if you know what I mean.

2. Dating when you are not serious (both adults). This is one of those situations where you have to give her something, flowers and a card, but you really don't want to spend the money because you have only been dating for a few weeks. I would say you are out of luck and need to spend the money on something. But don't dump her on February 12 to save money on flowers (carnations hand-carried are fine) and a card. We are talking $10 (if you don't live in New York). Just think of it as part of being in the dating scene. And, yes, taking her out on this night would be oh-so-nice.

3. Dating when you are not serious (both children). If you are in elementary school, if it is anything like when I went to school, the girls loved having boyfriends and the boys ignored our shrill cries and claimed we had cooties. The boys are under no obligation to get anything, but those little candy hearts with "you're swell" will make her heart beat pitter-patter-pitter-patter. And you will be razzed by your friends. Both good things.

4. Dating when you are not serious (mixture of adults and children). Ew. Don't even joke about it.

5. Dating when you are not serious (mixture of adults and animals). Ew. See number 4.

6. Dating Paris Hilton. I can't help you. You have poor taste and even poorer decision-making skills. Just wear nice briefs in case your after-dark escapades make it onto film.

This is longer than I intended the post to be, but you know me, I like my writing to encourage people to get together like bunnies. And do the bunny hop.

This blog is currently moving

Blogger
Okay, all day yesterday, there was a message: "This blog is currently moving." I had written my post yesterday, and as in previous postings, asking if I would want to move my blog. I have read that eventually all blogger blogs will be converted, so my mind changed and I knew that I would have to eventually change. I thought to myself, "what the hell," it should only take a few minutes.

I mean, the message did say that most blogs would take a couple of minutes to convert. Nearly eight hours later, the blog finished its conversion process. Thanks, blogger. Well, the good news is that it appears that the posts made it. Not all of the comments did however. For instance, mal made a comment yesterday, and she became anonymous after the conversion. Sorry, sweetie.

Comfort Zones
~deb has a really interesting post today, in "Waters to Swim..."
Have you heard about the frog that was born at the bottom of the well? He thought life couldn’t get any better till one day he looked up and saw daylight. Climbing up to investigate, he was amazed to find a much larger pond than the one he lived in. After hopping twice, he was eaten by a snake.

Okay, ~deb's post actually started a lot better than that. I am all about taking some chances. But sometimes when you expand your world, a snake eats your ass.

Receiving Gifts
I received a wonderful gift yesterday. I was running around, in a hurry, and I stopped in the local Walgreens. Well, it was not one near where I live, but I wanted a soda on the way to do some other errands. So here I am in line, behind a woman who was counting single dollars and coins to make a purchase.

All of a sudden, her face went ashen, and I could tell she did not have enough for her purchases. Her total was around $36 dollars. I never spend that much in Walgreens. Anyway, I felt for the woman. Looking at my watch, I formed an idea.

I gave the cashier two crisp twenties, asked him to scan my soda and said I was with her. After scanning my soda, I told the woman to grab the change and I would be out in the car. I left, and as I was driving away, I saw her start walking down the street.

I don't know who this woman was, just some frail old lady with kind eyes and years of work etched into her hands. I sometimes wonder if I offended her; I hope not. Since she was already wondering which item to put back, I think her mind was not on me, but on her next step.

I am a nut about "giving trees." I like them because you can give and still remain anonymous. Our church has one, the local convenience store, the grocery store, schools. I love giving for the feeling I get. And I try to remain anonymous because I think it is important to give for the right reasons. The only reason I am writing about it here is – well two-fold – perhaps I can inspire others, and well, I have nothing to write about today and this fills space.

One thing I did do a few years ago is ask my hubbie to actually purchase items for the church giving tree. I pulled two "angels" (paper angels with ages and sexes of needy kids) and sent him to the store to make purchases. He is a bit of a tightwad, and I wanted him to loosen his purse strings. Well, not purse strings, but you get the idea. It was very hard for him to do, and he complained that he was spending more on strangers than our own family's children. Yeah, it was painful for him.

The next year, I gathered two more "angels" (two church-goers = two angels) and planned on purchasing them myself. I just did not want to inflict more pain. I am a bitch; I am, however, not heartless. Funny thing is that hubbie picked up an additional angel and asked if he could again purchase the gifts. Blew my freekin' mind.

Hopefully this "new blogger" will improve. Perhaps I will kick my writing up a notch as well. After all, I am not heartless.

Xtians and Lesbians

Okay, today is all about bugging the crap out of Grant. That's what this post is about.

Actually, ~Deb sort of tricked me yesterday. She said, "Hey, everybody, you have to read this." Don't click on the link – it is a freakin' Christian trap. It truly is. And they sucked me into the discussion.

I know, I know. We only have so many synapses, and I had to waste several firing in this issue. The rest of you can leave, because this post is for Grant. Not that he is a lesbian, but he hates this discussion. Xtians, you know.

This is all about lesbian love. And with Dani and ~Deb, you know it will be a love-fest. First, let's get the Leviticus passage out in the open. It is sitting there, like the elephant in the room that few really talk about.

Revised Standard Version (RSV): "You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination."

New International Version (NIV): "Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable."

King James Version (KJV): "Thou shalt not lie with mankind as with womankind: it is abomination."

English Standard Version (ESV) : "You shall not lie with a man as with a woman; it is abomination."

Living Bible: "Homosexuality is absolutely forbidden, for it is an enormous sin."

New Living Translation: "Do not practice homosexuality; it is a detestable sin."

I knew an extremely bright person in college. He learned Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek in college, mostly so he could read copies of the original texts and discern their meaning for himself. At the time, I thought he was fairly egocentric, believing he could upturn truths that have been studied by scholars for millennia. Anyway, I know so much less than this man – and no, you perverts, I did not sin with him. But we are really trying to say that this is a sin or not.

I have read the Leviticus passage (not in the original text, though I have seen it and cannot even read the letters very well), and I am puzzled as to why some focus on this passage. The passage in the ancient Hebrew is clearly talking about male-male sex acts (okay, I got this from somewhere else, because I can't read the original texts). By using the word "homosexuality," the English translation appears to condemn lesbian activity as well. The word "homosexual" was first used in the very late in 19th century. There was no Hebrew word that meant "homosexual." The latter behavior (lesbian sex) is definitely not mentioned in the original Hebrew text of this passage. In fact, lesbian behavior is not mentioned anywhere in the Hebrew Scriptures. A hint for us really stupid Christians: whenever the word "homosexual" or "All Terrain Vehicle (ATV)" is seen in an English translation of the Bible, one should be wary that the translators might be inserting their own prejudices into the text. So we are on shaky ground to start with.

Actually, some believe that this rule is against some form of anal sex in a Pagan temple ritual – one specific type of anal sex. Now, I could not find any sketches of this Pagan temple ritual, but my research is not complete. All I can say is that I have enough reverse cowgirl pics to fill a hard drive!

The term "homosexuality" has two meanings in English: (1) sexual behavior (what some people do) or (2) sexual orientation (what some people are). Actually, the Catholic Church is concerned with behavior, not orientation. I don't know how many reverse cowgirl pics the Vatican has on their hard drives.

Leviticus mentions two types of sins: (1) moral sin and (2) ceremonial uncleanliness. The male anal sex sin is a moral sin, whereas eating shellfish is an example of ceremonial uncleanliness. Incidentally, one type of sin was not necessarily less severe than the other type. Some ceremonial uncleanliness sins actually carried the death penalty. Furthermore, I am puzzled why people don't rally against shellfish with as much fervor as they rally against lesbian sex.

What continues to bounce around in my brain is the following:
"You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind. This is the great and first commandment. And a second is like it, You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments depend all the law and the prophets."
--Matthew 22:37-40

It occurs to me that Jesus was alluding to the fact that for many years, Jews would bicker over which sins were worse than other sins. Sort of reminds me what I see from both Dani and ~Deb, two Christian women who spend time daily, meditating, reading, and learning from the same book – the Bible. Dani harps on ~Deb's lesbian sex acts (I think she just likes thinking about lesbian sex) and ~Deb talks about loving thy neighbor. Actually, the neighbor thing is much more well-defined in the Bible.

I am not a lesbian (don't even play one on TV) – but that does not make me without sin. I committed some horrible sins against God and my husband, sins which I am still mending. So don't tell me not to cast any stones. I understand that. I am crude, and rude and sometimes joke about my religion (see above). Well, let me continue to meditate about lesbian sex. I am sure it is what the conservative Christians would have me do.

~Deb's Chest Confuses Me

The other day, I mentioned something about women wearing t-shirts that had "stop staring at my chest" sayings, and how silly it is, since, well, to get the message, you have to stare and their chest. And unlike a very readable billboard, most of these ladies do not provide flat surfaces in which to communicate their visual communication.

In the comments, ~Deb mentions something about one of her favorite shirts was "WWJD", but her left nipple seemed to look more like a period on the shirt, so she stopped wearing it. No, that was not what she said. She told a story about how she was wearing a "USA" t-shirt once, and how some guy came up to her and said something like, "I like your vowels." I would like to point out two things concerning this story: (1) it would have mortified me, and I too, would have never worn the shirt again, and (2) the guy had to hear that line from somewhere else. It takes thought and knowing the difference between consonants and vowels, and I think we can all agree that most men have neither of those traits.

Well, yesterday I saw a t-shirt on a guy with a college emblem. I actually did not know the college at the time, it was a U with an I inside of it. I first thought "University of Iowa," but then considered that Indiana, Illinois and several other states that I memorized when I was in the fifth grade all started with I and probably had universities as well. Turns out, it is Indiana University. You can click on the hyperlink to see what I mean. Well, the first thing I thought was "that symbol looks phallic to me." I should say, that symbol should look phallic to anyone who has seen, sucked, taken a picture of, or buried it into the core of her being. You get the idea. So here this guy has this big red penis on his shirt, and he has no idea.

The other thing I thought was that there are a crapload of states that have either "IU" or "U of I" designations for their schools. And Indiana is confusing the fact by placing the I and U in alignment. You get no clue as to what university you are talking about. But this is the first time I have seen the shirt in this part of the world, which leads me to falsely assume: (1) they don't graduate a bunch of people, or (2) the ones who graduate are not proud of being associated with the school. Okay, the graduation may be off, because I googled it, and it seems that enrollment in their 8 campuses is about 98,545. If even a fraction of these graduate, that is a lot of people with these logos on their chests. They must be embarrassed or sick of people asking where Indiana is on the map. Heck, around here, some people think it is a province in Canada. I could have told the guy I was sad about Edmonton loosing in the Stanley Cup – heck, Canada is just one frozen wasteland, right? With Indiana somewhere in the middle? That's why they play in the Big 10 – only Canadian school to be in the NCAA – a little-known fact, dear readers.

I know, I know, someone is going to comment that Indiana has a lot of big and important cities in it, including Chicago. Well, all I have to say is that some of us think Chicago is in Illinois – but no one is sure exactly. Unless you live in Chicago; then you just have to check where you pay your taxes to. Well, let me get out of here before I alienate both the Canadians living in Indiana and the folks living in the Windy City. I would make fun of Iowa as well, but I can't spell the state!

~Deb's Dating Service

~Deb's Dating Service
I was reading ~deb the other day, and she is starting her own dating service. One of her friends, Tamar, needs sex bad. I mean, one of her friends needs to find someone. Well, needs is probably a little strong. She wants to find someone.

Funny how people find one another. There is a movie I have not seen in quite some time, When Harry Met Sally. Interspersed through the movie are couples (actors?) who talked about how they met. Most of the meetings seemed to be chance meetings. Romantic, wonderful … Hollywood. Okay, I am a mush.

How simply romantic it would be to meet someone by chance – "you know, I really don't meet people from the Internet, but I just had a feeling." I met my hubbie by chance. But I am not telling the story – and, no, I wasn't working at a strip club at the time. Nor was I a hooker – I was giving it away at the time.

Love and Marriage
You know why I think most people marry? To have someone else observe their own life, who has a stake in the matter. To be able to bitch and complain, pour champagne in a glass when things go well, lend a shoulder when things go poorly.

I am so happy I found hubbie when I did. I am not sure I would be any good in today's dating scene. But I read about Tamar, about others, and I think to myself, "I wish they could find someone."

You know, love is a madness. You simply fall for someone. But being in love, and being able to marry, those are two different things. To successfully marry, you have to be willing to sacrifice. You have to be willing to accept an "of the rack" hubbie when hungering for a custom-tailored one. And many of us girls don't want to sacrifice for who people are. We want to make them "better." Change their nature.

And I am not talking about turning the other cheek when hubbie is banging the neighbor. I am talking about letting him watch the football game, knowing that black tie evenings are a sacrifice he is willing to make, how cooking the meals doesn't diminish your importance. I have heard that "women often love women who are unworthy of them." It is a saying that has the ring of truth, but I don't believe it. I believe that, for the most part, women marry their equals. Men do the same. We might not see it as so, but our values and theirs are different, and frankly, it is only the married couple's opinion that matters. Well, there are some extreme cases, but we won't go there.

When I was a 23-year-old "old maid," all of my friends were trying to fix me up with people. My friends reminded me of lemmings jumping off the marriage cliff. You know, get the degree in May and get married to the college sweetheart in June. I remember going to so many weddings right after my degree. I thought they wanted me to marry because they wanted me to suffer the trials and tribulations along with them.

I chose to wait.

But now, I think they were just happy and wanted me to experience a similar happiness.

I have lots of virtual friends here, but three stand out as guys that are available and seem like they want to find their soul mates. Again, there are probably more, but at this instance, I can think of three.

1. Ddot. He was the first person I read and liked enough to link to. He lives in the DC area, which means he may live in Virginia or Maryland or the that little diamond we call the District of Columbia, wedged between the states. Funny thing is that Virginians and Marylanders don't like one another. I don't know if they can't stand each others smell or what, but that would be an issue that Ddot could not overcome. He is sexy, smart, shy and funny. And some would call him conceited. I think he is a very complicated man – his blog, which may be endangered due to his local IT department, is a mixture of humor, politics and race relations. With a side of Michael Jordon worship. And when you take a look at his blog, 96% of his readers are attractive women. Grant, Rell and Arson are the exceptions.

2. Joe. He does a weekly picture show on his blog. Not any HNT, but on Friday, he has goofy pictures and writes funny captions. More than once, I nearly wet myself when reading his blog. He is really funny, and from his writing, it sounds like he is a true romantic. Which can be dangerous at times, but he lives in New York City (and the cabbies are dangerous as well there). He may not be at a good "relationship place" right now. Hard to tell. But when you read his posts, he seems so sweet and sincere.

3. Mike. I hesitate to add Mike to the list, as he got married to ~deb, in a blog wedding. But since ~deb still is living with her M, I am not sure this counts in real life. Okay, the downside is that he lives in Wisconsin. I don't even know where that is – somewhere near Canada and no beaches, I think. Again, he is humorous, and is in touch with his feminine side. That's what attracted ~deb, I am sure.

Please note that humor is part of all three of these guys. And that, according to ~deb number two, is real important (see here for the blog entry).

Or you could get a dog. But you can't fuck a dog. And those who disagree, well, let's not go there. I am not copying ~deb's dating service, first because none of these guys is asking me (sorry in advance, sweeties). Second, because – well, crap, it looks like I am copying ~deb. But my point is more about finding someone and less about measurable outcomes. Not that I don't want these stud muffins to find their soul mate, but I am not hopeful. And I am sort of mad at Mike because (1) he married the ~deb babe (jealousy is a bitch), and (2) I was going to write about Subway today.

Squiggly Wiggly
Now I have two squiggly Deb's reading me every once in a while. We all know the ~deb from New York. Well, at least I am very familiar with her. She is very talented and I think she also has a good heart. It seems she does, at least. And then there is a new squiggly ~Deb, a Dr. Deb.

I wrote some dribble today. It started out in my brain as funny, but when I put fingertip to keyboard, I failed. Guess I will try again tomorrow. And it is too darned long.