I'm in love...with a pillow?

There was this fascinating-in-a-repellent way article by Lisa Katayama in the New York Times Magazine last Sunday July 26 called "Love in 2-D" (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/26/magazine/26FOB-2DLove-t.html?scp=1&sq=%22Love%20in%202-D%22&st=cse), which describes a "Lars & The Real Girl"-like situation (rent that movie if you haven't seen it) in which seemingly normal Japanese men fall in love with body-pillow girlfriends based on comic-book characters.

Yes. They fall in love with pillows. The article describes how some of these men even take their pillow-girlfriends out to dinner or to the beach, as if they were real ("the restaurant was packed with young families. Several mothers gave Nemutan [the pillow] inquisitive looks, but the majority seemed not to notice her"). That's weird enough, but what's more disturbing is these girl-pillows really are depictions of GIRLS -- around 10 - 12 years old.

Ew.

My friends and I read about this together last weekend when they were visiting (actually, one of them read it aloud to the rest of us on the subway, which is probably the most awesome way to experience this article), and one of my friends, playing devil's advocate, asked, "But these guys aren't hurting anyone, so what's wrong with it?"

"They're hurting themselves!" I said. Just like people who fall in love with bridges, or towers, or other inanimate objects (see my March 31, 2009 post at http://www.bestdatesnow.com/2009/03/i-love-you-you-cute-inanimate-object.html), the more in love these men fall with pillows, the less chance they have of finding a real relationship, which is much more fulfilling. But apparently there are a lot of lovelorn people in Japan -- more than 25% of men and women between the ages of 30 - 34 are virgins. A 40-year-old man named Toru Honda, who writes books promoting the "2-D lifestyle," brings up the following issue:

"Honda wrote, 'As long as you train your imagination, a 2-D relationship is much more passionate than a 3-D one.' Honda insists that he’s advocating not prurience but a whole new kind of romance. If, as some researchers suggest, romantic love can be broken down into electrical impulses in the brain, then why not train the mind to simulate those signals while looking at an inanimate character?"

But when Honda "admitted to watching human porn at a panel discussion in Tokyo in 2005, several hundred hard-core 2-D lovers in the audience booed with shock that their dear leader had nostalgia for the 3-D world. Later, in an interview with a Japanese newspaper, Honda clarified his position, saying that he was worried 2-D love was becoming an easy way out for young otaku, who might still have a shot at success in the real world. 'I’m not saying that everyone should throw away hopes of real romance right away. I am simply saying that guys like me who have gotten to a point of no return can be happy living in 2-D.'"

He's only 40, and he's already given up on love? I think that is very sad! (Hasn't he seen "The 40-Year-Old Virgin"?)

This whole thing reminds of the red blue/blue pill choice in "The Matrix." The illusion of a girlfriend, or of any reality, may be safer, prettier, easier -- but in the end, it's just an illusion. Hate to say it, but no pillow is going to love you back.

(P.S. For non-dating-related posts, check out my other blog at http://herartichokeheart.blogspot.com/)

Facebook: Blasts from My (Dating) Past

As I posted on my other blog (http://HerArtichokeHeart.blogspot.com), a few weeks ago I discovered someone on Facebook I'd been looking for on and off since 2007: Hyper Boy! If you don't remember him from my March 10, 2008 post (http://www.bestdatesnow.com/2008/03/goin-to-chapel-part-2.html ), the abridged version is that we met at St. Bart's Church in Manhattan back in 2002 (http://www.stbarts.org) but only lasted a few months because he was too hyper for me, and he believed that non-Christians wouldn't get into heaven. I lost touch with him after we parted ways but what happened to him. I suspected he'd moved back down south, where he was from, and had gotten married, maybe had a kid or two. I also wondered if he'd stuck with the jewelry-design career he was beginning to embark on when we broke up. Well, thanks to Facebook I learned he did graduate from jewelry-design school, and five years ago he moved back down south. He does still design jewelry sometimes, but he's also an apprentice electrician, which sounds like a more stable career for him. And, he's engaged! Intriguingly, under political views he listed himself as a Democrat, and under religious views, he put "Open." Sounds like his time in NYC made him a bit more liberal after all.

THEN a few days ago, I got a really interesting message from him. He wrote he wanted to drop a line to clear his soul, as he put it, and he continued, "I have to apologize for being careless or hurtful. I had a wonderful time with you! I am glad that I got to spend what time did with you when we were together! Of course people change and I am glad we can be friends!! This is awesome! Its great to see you traveling lots! I do not get to do that much any more. What with getting a house and married and the like! Any who I will keep in touch. Take it easy!!"

Wasn't that so nice? I certainly never expected it! But the funny part happened after I wrote back thanking him, and asking when his big (wedding) day is. He wrote, "We are shooting for the first or second week in January. I want something unique but she is the traditional one... we will work something out. :) I hope you have a great weekend to! Hope you get to see some more of those wonderful museums up there!!"

I had to laugh when I read that last sentence. When we were dating he could not get through a museum without being completely immature and running around like a 12-year-old! Ha! I guess he really has matured. That's a good thing. :)

Why we love who we love

There's a new book out called "Why Him? Why Her? Finding Real Love by Analyzing Your Personality Type," by Helen Fisher, a biological anthropologist. Here's a link to an article by Martin Bashir, Rob Wallace and Connie Clark from ABC's "20/20": http://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=6734449&page=1 Fisher is apparently the woman behind the questionnaire used by the dating site Chemistry (http://www.chemistry.com/). Based on brain research, she thinks that there are four broad personality types associated with four specific neurotransmitters and hormones: dopamine, serotonin, testosterone and estrogen. According to the article, "Fisher believes we are all some combination of these four types, which she has named the explorer (dopamine), the builder (serotonin), the director (testosterone) and the negotiator (estrogen). Good examples of the risk-taking explorers, Fisher said, would be John F. Kennedy, Ernest Hemingway and Angelina Jolie. Colin Powell, she said, exemplifies the calm, traditional builder. Directors are analytical, tough-minded and decisive, and Fisher believes Bill Gates is a perfect example. Negotiators, on the other hand, are emotionally expressive and empathetic. A good example? Bill Clinton. 'He says, "I feel your pain," Fisher laughed."



She decided to design a questionnaire to try to elicit which of these four types each person is, and see how they matched up through the Chemistry dating site. It turns out that "explorers go for other explorers, and builders go for other builders. But the high testosterone directors go for the high-estrogen negotiators, and vice versa."



The end of the article includes a 3-question quiz. I suspected I'm a negotiator. I got "director" for the first question, "negotiator" for the second question, and very low testosterone for the third question, which is more negotiator-like and very anti-director. The next time I'm at the bookstore, I'll have to look through this book. Or you can go to http://www.whyhimwhyher.com/ to take the complete questionnaire.

Make dating worth your while

Imagine getting paid to date. Just go out on a date, no sex involved. Well, you can, according to Emily Brady's article, "See Dick Pay Jane: Chaste Dating for Cash," in the May 26th Village Voice (http://www.villagevoice.com/2009-05-27/news/see-dick-pay-jane-chaste-dating-for-cash/). Several months ago, a few enterprising young women figured out that men would actually pay for the opportunity simply to have a date -- someone to go out to dinner with, or take to a ball game. They founded Austen's Janes Agency (http://austensjanes.com) to fill this void. As the article states, "For $60 an hour, the agency arranges for a smart young woman to accompany you, laugh at your jokes, and make you feel interesting and special. It may sound like just another escort service—with additional sex services available by negotiation—but it's not. The women who set up the agency are adamant about this, and they spell it out on their website: 'If there are any attempts at sexual activity, the girl has the right to end the date immediately.'"

I can relate to the reasoning behind the 26-year-old unemployed women who started the agency. As one of them put it, "I've been on so many bad dates, it was kind of a joke because it felt like work sometimes. You might as well get paid for it."

Why would men pay for this? One married guy just got a rush from pretending to have an affair -- paying a woman for her time and her dinner was as close to an affair as he actually wanted to get. Half the guys are foreign-born, and some of them haven't had any success yet on the on-line dating sites, so this fills the void for now. And other men apparently just enjoy the occasional platonic afternoon or evening with a pretty woman, no strings attached.

Getting paid to date -- now why didn't I think of that? I could've retired by now. ;)

Maybe they're just not that into you

Sean McGinn, a man from my 'hood (Brooklyn), is suing Match.com (http://www.match.com) for $5 million because women he contacted didn't write him back. According to this article, "N.Y.C. Man Sues Match.Com for Cyberspace ‘Bait and Switch’" on AttorneyAtLaw.com (http://www.attorneyatlaw.com/2009/06/nyc-man-sues-matchcom-for-cyberspace-bait-and-switch/), this man believes the site shouldn't list non-paying singles' profiles and photos, since they can't respond to his e-mails and winks, and therefore he gets his feelings hurt. As the article explains, "In his lawsuit, filed in a New York federal court, McGinn said he suffered 'humiliation and disappointment' when women he tried to contact through Match.com did not respond to his cyber-advances."

Hey, I feel your pain, buddy -- try being a woman older than 34 on the site. The last time I was on, I wrote to over 30 guys in a month and got about 2 responses. But I don't necessarily agree that Match is being "deceitful," as McGinn claims. I mean, when you sign up, they tell you about the free trial and not having to pay, but they make it clear if you don't pay, you can't read e-mails or respond to them. Did McGinn think that offer only applied to him? Like any smart business, Match tries to lure you in so you end up becoming a paid subscriber. Yes, it can be painful when people don't write you back -- but $5 million worth of pain?? Grow a thicker skin, man!

And I must give credit where credit is due: I did meet the Nicest Guy in the World on Match (it just took me an embarrassingly long time to realize we should be dating. :)

Lies men tell on the first date

Here's an article from Cosmo by Gregory Gilderman, "Dating 101: First-Date Red Flags," about lies that guys tell on the first date (http://dating.personals.yahoo.com/singles/datingtips/88111/dating-101-first-date-red-flags). They include "I never move this fast on a first date"; "I'll call you" (I certainly heard that lie a lot!); "I'm between jobs"; and "I've never had a serious girlfriend." Apparently, "I'm between jobs" can mean "I'm unemployed because I have no direction in life." But speaking as an underemployed person, I think you have to cut people some slack on that one in this economy!

I was most intrigued by "I've never had a serious girlfriend." I don't think I've ever had a guy say that to me on the first date. Wouldn't they be afraid I'd think something was wrong with them? Not according to Gilderman -- he writes that some guys say that, even if they HAVE had a serious girlfriend, as "a sly way of admitting he can't commit" -- or doesn't want to commit.

Rich men, young women

The NY Times had an article in their Magazine section on April 12th by Ruth Padawer, "Keeping Up With Being Kept" (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/12/magazine/12sugardaddies-t.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&sq=Seeking%20Arrangement&st=cse&scp=2) about this web site called Seeking Arrangement (http://www.SeekingArrangement.com), a site that hooks up financially strapped young women with sugar daddies -- and it has 300,000 registered subscribers. Examples include "the 18-year-old from France asking for $5,000 to $10,000 a month from 'a mentor who can provide me with the finer things in life and keep me happy!' And the 49-year-old investor from upstate New York willing to pay $5,000 a month for a 'daytime playmate' for 'intense connection without commitment.'" Many of the women are looking for money for college. It's depressing that college has gotten so expensive that some women feel they have to resort to this.

The most interesting part was how some of the members interviewed tried to justify their relationships. To me, it sounds like prostitution -- the men may claim they're paying for "companionship," but you know that means sex. But some of the women "say being a sugar baby is no more an occupation than dating is, especially when the goal of dating is to find a rich boyfriend or a wealthy husband. They routinely turn down creeps interested in nothing but sex. Some sugar babies also insist that wives who stay in miserable marriages for an American Express black card, mansion or country-club membership are more like prostitutes than they are."

But the difference is, a woman and her rich boyfriend or wealthy husband either are in love or hopefully were at some point! They didn't enter into their relationship strictly for the money, but because they actually cared about each other. And that makes all the difference in the world.