Recently in Relationships Category

Olbermann calls out support for Prop 8 and it is damn good. Watch it.

Full transcript here.

You're sitting in the airport terminal, rolling your copy of the Economist into a sweaty tube and waiting to see a significant other who lives far away. You're excited. You're aroused. But there's something else, a nagging feeling that gurgles in your stomach and won't go away. Is it pangs of guilt? It should be: The planet is about to suffer for your love.

As someone who has had my fair share of long distance relationships (LDRs for short) this Slate article really struck a chord with me.

By spending all their free time out of town or staring at a webcam--that is, in their apartments or airline cabins, rather than in parks, bowling alleys, and pubs--long-distance lovers erode civic commitment and social support networks. They have fewer chances to meet new people.

What's more, out-of-town daters have less sex than local couples--and long stretches of abstinence between visits could lead to negative health outcomes and thus higher health care costs. Distance also magnifies the impact of negative feelings like longing and suspicion; according to one study, intercity lovers are more likely to be depressed and less likely to share resources or take care of each other when sick. And they spend money on travel that they might otherwise save and invest--leaving them vulnerable to economic shocks and wearing away their future standard of living. Every one of these demons could be banished by simply dating local.

I couldn't agree more. I've been joking with some friends of mine about wanting to start a campaign against long distance relationships. Constantly missing your significant other, spending your life on the phone, always counting the days until you see them, or the days until you have to say goodbye again.

I think our increasingly globalized and technologized world is making LDRs much easier (and maybe more likely). Internet dating, email and social networking sites all make it much easier for us to connect with people who live far away. These things also make it much easier to maintain your connection with someone--you can always be connected to them, at least virtually. What used to be cheap airfare also makes it easier to visit one another (although that might be changing).

Now, it's not always easy to avoid LDRs. People move away, for jobs, or school, or other life decisions. I know there are couples out there who have made it work. But maybe Slate has a point--if we have a local food movement, why not a date local movement?

Thanks to Tanya for the link

I got wind of this new entrepreneurial venture, Ignighter, awhile ago from my friend Hannah and thought I would share it all with you. Two recent college grads (both guys) have started an online dating site that allows groups of friends to mingle and jangle, rather than depending on that one little love connection.

How it works: basically you get together with all your college roommates or your cubicle crew or your James Baldwin book club (look, I know someone who has one), and then you create a profile as a group. Once you've created your group's page, you can then browse the other groups and--if all parties consent--make a time to meet up and see how it all shakes out.

I see some major advantages to this scenario. First and foremost, it's way more natural than the big pressure of meeting a total stranger in a bar or whatever and hoping to hit it off. As we all know, online profiles rarely predict blast off chemistry. With this set up, you get to evaluate the vibe of a bunch of people in the flesh.

I also like that it sort of takes away the emphasis on ROMANTIC relationships. Two crews hanging seems like it would lead to a love connection or two and plenty of friendships, whereas when it doesn't work out one on one, sometimes it's hard to transition into a friendship.

And as the founders argue, it is safer. Though I haven't heard much about sketchy online dating experiences (have you, readers?), I do see the advantage of having your crew of friends around in case some meet up ends up feeling sketchy.

Downsides? The pictures on the site seem pretty white (no love for people of color?). I'm sure if you really get deep into profile browsing you can find yourself love of all kinds, but it would be nice to feature some people of color on the homepage.

So what do you all think? Group pumpkin pickin' date?

Reader Julia sent us a link to this posting on Madison, Wisconsin Craigslist. Pretty amazing stuff:

I'm married. Been married for 14 years. I moved away from my family to be with my wife's family, left my career, friends, & family behind. I now work out of my house because my wife got a "better" job else where and now I do ALL of the cooking and cleaning and take care of my 3 kids. She's the typical MALE now...comes homes, I have dinner ready. She works more at home. I play with the kids. She goes to bed, I have to go to bed. My whole life revolves around her now. She's the Sun and I'm Uranus. She leaves dirty clothes on the floor. Trash on tables. HAIR everywhere!! I SIT to pee now cuz I hate to clean up pubic hairs off the toilets....it's disgusting.

Yes, he's experiencing what many women have experienced for decades. But no one deserves to feel this way about their life or relationship. What I dislike about the entire tone of this post, however, is that he's not just pissed off about the unequal nature of his relationship. He's pissed because he's "THE WOMAN" -- as in, women are the ones who should doing all the shit work:

I feel I'm being converted to a female in some sick way. I AM NOT A WOMAN! I love women. But I now know what they put up with. It sucks. No thanks for dinner....not even "dinner was great dear...how 'bout I clean up the dishes"....NNOOOOOO. Just a couple of grunts and it's off to work....kinda like a guy going to the garage for the evening. I have tools. I'd love to go to the garage and work. But I think my kids come first. I'd love to have an affair but don't think I can deal with the guilt. If I start to PMS.......I'll scream. Oh...and don't think she's "MAN" enough to mow the yard or shovel the drive...nope...that's me too. Who gets the groceries....ME. My nipples stick out in the frozen food section too by the way. No one tries to pick me up though. I did get asked by the cashier what was for dinner once!!! I must have something written on my forhead. So women, ladies, how do you put up with it???

I'll admit to laughing at the nipples-in-the-frozen-food-aisle line, but I genuinely feel bad for this guy. In light of our conversation last week about balancing relationships with chores and the ins and outs of living together, does anyone have advice for this man?

Am I going to hate him for watching TV? Is he going to hate me for being so picky about the volume on the stereo? Will I end up doing his laundry by default and then being bitter about it? How do we get alone time? Who's going to clean the toilet?

These are just some of the questions that have been going through my head as of late. After a very, very long indy courtship, my partner and I are moving in. I'm totally excited and more than a little nervous. It seems to me that I'm embarking on a journey that will land me squarely at the center of feminism's unfinished business. How do we share lives and space without losing ourselves? How do we keep things equal, intentional, exciting? How do we take care of each other and ourselves simultaneously?

According to Alternative to Marriage:

• there are 11 million people living with an unmarried partner in the United States, including both same-sex and different-sex couples (2000 Census).


• between 1960 and 2000, the number of unmarried cohabiting couples increased one thousand percent.


• 41% of American women ages 15-44 have cohabited (lived with an unmarried different-sex partner) at some point. This includes 9% of women ages 15-19, 38% of women ages 20-24, 49% of women ages 25-29, 51% of women ages 30-34, 50% of women ages 35-39, and 43% of women ages 40-44.

So some of you out there must be in this lovely/difficult situation. Anyone got tips for how two feminists cohabitate successfully? Are there any great books on the subject?

*Um, please keep in mind that I have a one bedroom apartment, so tips like, "just make sure to have your own yoga room and give him a den with wood paneling and a humidor" won't exactly fly. I mean, not that you would. Just sayin'.

After California granted gay couples equal access to marriage, the state changed its official marriage licenses, which used to have spaces to fill in the names of the "bride" and "groom." The form now reads "Party A" and "Party B" instead. No big deal, right? Well, a one whiny, privileged hetero couple is very offended.

"We are traditionalists - we just want to be called bride and groom," said Bird, 25, who works part time for her father's church. "Those words have been used for generations and now they just changed them."   [...]

And Rachel Bird described her position as "personal - not religious."

"We just feel that our rights have been violated," she said.

To some, the couple's stand may seem frivolous. But others believe "bride" and "groom" are terms that are too important for the state to set aside.

"Those who support (same-sex marriage) say it has no impact on heterosexuals," said Brad Dacus of the Pacific Justice Institute. "This debunks that argument."

Oh my god, are you kidding me? Which right, exactly, has been violated? Their right to control the language on state marriage licenses? As PZ Myers says, (via)

The wingnuts have long been claiming that allowing gays to marry somehow hurts their heterosexual marriages, a claim that is patently silly and false, and now they've got two idiots who will voluntarily slap themselves with a penalty so they can claim genuine damages. This is not credible.

No, it's not.

On a related note... from the archives on the California same-sex marriage law, check out Miriam on why marriage isn't her golden ticket, Courtney on how gay marriage has her rethinking her personal views on getting hitched, and Samhita on how marriage laws erase transgendered people.

Today the Washington Post covers a new book with the earth-shattering thesis that, if women want to "keep a man" they should start scrubbing floors in lingerie, learning to cook steaks to order, and giving blowjobs in between.

Is that cover condescending or what? And that's not even getting into the content of the book...

Moore's slim treatise purports to explain how women should go about sex, relationships and marriage -- according to men. Here is his mission as a self-described reeducator: "I want to express my anger and frustration as a man with the women I feel are miseducated, misinformed, and ill-prepared about their responsibilities in getting and maintaining a relationship with a man of quality," he writes in the introduction.

Moore, of course, considers himself just such a man. Read his book, ladies, and you can snag a catch just like him. Your responsibilities include cooking, staying skinny, wearing sexy things around the house and doing whatever your man tells you to do (because, Moore writes, "Here's a little secret, ladies: men never really ask for anything. They command. . . . And believe me, what you won't do, ten broads around the corner will.")

Ugh. The sad part is, he's found this method successful:

Moore's girlfriend, Khanequa Tuitt, who's at the book-signing, recalls that when she first read his manuscript, she only got past the first couple of pages before calling him to curse him out. But now she's come to terms with his views. She's started "trying to stay away from wearing frumpy, flannel stuff," even when she's cleaning, for example.

Moore also keeps it classy with a "no fatties" message:

In his book, size matters -- a lot: "The fatter you get, the more you decrease your potential single-man pool. Let me give you an example. When you go to the grocery store to shop, do you pick out the nastiest-looking, most rotten, smelliest fruit or meat you can find? Oh, you don't? Why not? . . . It's the same with men when they see baby elephant-sized, out-of-shape women."

The interesting thing is that (as you may have noticed from the cover above), the book is "presented by" Zane, a best-selling writer of black erotica. (As M.Dot at Model Minority writes today, "Zane sells because her fiction allows Black women to be sexual in a culture that refuses to acknowledge that we are sexual, a culture that calls us ho's if are so inclined to be sexual, talk about sex, or even look like we are human and have a sexual appetite.") But Zane says her name on the book is not an endorsement -- it's a warning: "There are some men who feel exactly like he does. I feel like women should be forewarned and realize what's out there."