"Determining the relationship"

"I think we should talk about...us." - Me

"Ok." - Him

"Uh.  That was met with less resistance than I expected." - Me

"Eh.  Guys only try to avoid relationship talks when they don't want the relationship to progress.  Which, of course, is the majority of the time." - Him

Why long distance relationships suck.

Long distance relationships don't suck.

Actually, they're kind of awesome.  Unless you're 6,000 miles apart (yes, I did once carry on a relationship where I was in Tokyo and he was in Ann Arbor) and it's absurdly expensive to see each other (the plane tickets averaged about $1200 on a good day), the long distance thing can actually be kind of fun.

It's almost like...having all the good parts of a boyfriend, without the bad.  Don't get me wrong -- not everyone is cut out to be in a long distance relationship.  It helps that I'm fiercely independent, rarely jealous, and prone to feelings of being "trapped".  For me, being in a long distance relationship has never been a problem, as I usually have my own thing to do (with school, writing, and work), and having a fulltime boyfriend to add to the mix of my already hectic life is...difficult, to say the least.  That's not to say a long distance relationship is any less work than a real relationship, but let's just say I'd certainly be less productive during the workweek if I knew my boyfriend was right down the road.

And I'm sure he would be, too.  It's also awesome in that, whenever we see each other a lot of careful planning goes into each trip/visit.  We're consciously making time and setting it apart for the other person (something a lot of my friends in non-long distance relationships often complain about), and so when we are together, that time is just completely and totally ours.  We have enough advance notice (except when I go rogue spontaneous and fly out on a dime...which I've only done maybe twice) that we can adjust our schedules and devote all our waking hours to each other.

Plus, there's really nothing like that moment at the airport when you first see each other after any period of absence...

But, all that aside, there are those nights.

When I wish he was really just a phone call away.

When I can't settle for a text, or a chat, or a form of noncommunication.

When, yes, while all I want to do is talk to him...I also just want him to be with me.

These moments are few and far between, don't get me wrong -- but when they come, they come with such intensity that I am forced to realize how much face-time means.

"I've never been 'just friends' with a girl."

Have you ever had a guy say this to you?  And, not a guy who actually means, "My only friends are my mom, the guys I play Halo 3 on XBox Live with, and my two cats, Spock and Scoop."

Anyway, so said a hottie I met the other day at the camera store.  I was buying film, he was buying photo paper, it was a match made in a darkroom. 

Except, oh yeah, I have a boyfriend whom I love and adore.  We started discussing Ilford vs. Kodak, however, and the conversation turned to further flirtations.  We worked out that he was single-ish and I was taken, and I mentioned we could just be friends.

"Oh," he muttered, "I've never been 'just friends' with a girl that I didn't eventually end up pleasing."

Well.  Not only was that forward...but, what am I supposed to think?  I can understand -- because I used to be the same way -- how one might think this is an attractive response to such a situation. Guys (and girls) think that, by saying something akin to this they are demonstrating that they are just so irresistable to the opposite sex that they cannot possibly carry on a friendship with said opposite sex without it ultimately culminating in sexual satisfaction.

Uh, yeah.

Well, maybe it's because I'm taken, or maybe it's because I used to think that response was clever and sexy (when I said it), but now it just seems like a big warning sign.

He's never had a real female friend?  Hello, neuroses, mommy-issues, lack of basic human interaction skills...etc.  Yeah, I'd say if a guy admits to not being able to communicate with females without some sexual level involved, it's a problem, not an asset.

P.S.  Re: Post the other day -- I did get the discount, I even wrote an article on eHow about it!  Check it out: http://www.ehow.com/how_4824420_flirt-way-discount.html

"You don't carry yourself like you're single."

That's what the very cute, very charming computer tech guy told me at the computer repair shop, today.

My laptop died the other day (DC-in jack), so I immediately called the laptop repair people.  The guy on the other end of the line sounded cute (yes, guys can totally sound cute on the phone) and flirtatious, so I had hopes for, uh, being able to flirt my way into a discount.

When I arrived at the shop...I was surprised to find that he was, in fact, really cute.  Second-gen Japanese, very smooth, very charming, and very sweet.  Obviously into me.  Mmmhmm. 

Oh, right, but I have a boyfriend.  And, apparently...it shows.  As he said to me, "You're so cute, Sarah...but you don't carry yourself like you're single."

Hmm.

Real men eat meat

Living in New York City has taught me at least two important life-lessons.

First, you must always, always, ALWAYS look both ways when crossing a one-way street.  Second, if he's cute, clean, can dance, and spends more time on his eyebrows than you do...he's gay.

Okay, so the latter is not a maxim (the former is, though, so don't come running to me when you get hit by a rogue taxi because you were looking at the sky when crossing the tunnel exit street).  Yes, the latter is not always true. 

A guy can be cute, clean, a whiz on the dancefloor, and wax his eyebrows and not be gay.  What?! 

Yes, that's metrosexualism at its best.  And as great as the man-revolution might have been for those closet eyebrow-waxing men...it's hard to take a guy seriously if you can share jeans with him.  I'm sorry; I want to date a man. 

So, here are the criteria of "real men" (as defined by Sarah)

1.  Real men eat meat.

--  Real men--that is, tough, manly, homophobic, neanderthal-esque men--eat meat.  Real men are not vegetarians.  Even if men like vegetables, think that the meat industry is flawed, and like nature and trees and the environment, real men will realize that to exist solely on vegetation will garner him lack of respect and ridicule from other (real) men.  This should be enough to deter a real man from becoming a vegetarian.  If it's not...do you want to date him?

2.  Real men like sports.

--  This applies to all competitive activities.  Including video games.  Basically, real men are into competition.  To a near-obsessive level.  And fancy themselves star professional athletes.  Real men are delusional.  But that's what makes them men.

3.  Real men swear.

--  Barring religious fanatics (that is, with all these rules), real men swear.  Again, real men know that sometimes you just have to say the word "fuck".  Even if it's just to keep up appearances.  Real men keep up appearances, because there is nothing more important to real men than what their friends (and other men) think of them.  And they say we're the impressionable ones.

Okay, so if a guy doesn't fit these criteria, that doesn't mean you should throw him out.  But how can you deny that a swearing, meat-eating, sports-obsessed guy is not a Real Man (TM)?

Hah!  You can't. 

That is all.

What Sex and the City taught me about romance

Sex and the City, the rather apparent influence for the title of my blog, introduced us to an exciting, edgy, HBO-filtered world of liberated women searching for romance in a post-modern New York.  But, significantly, it introduced us to Samantha -- a sexy, sexual, successful PR rep.

What's fascinating about Samantha is, not her awesome job, or her straight-forward personality, but the way she views sex.  She has, what practically equates to, a different man every night, and she goes through relationships like water.  While Carrie laments over Big and Kristen lusts for the perfect, Upper-East Side life, Samantha has short, intensely sexual relationships.

Basically, Samantha views sex like a man.  And this, while fascinating, is actually not a good thing.

I know you probably hear this more than you care to, but let's throwback to the basics:  biology.

Biologically speaking, women are programmed to want a mate.  One mate, with whom to procreate, who will then stick around to care for and protect the family.

Men, biologically speaking, are programmed to want to spread their seed.  That is, have as many offspring as possible, which is only possible by mating with more than one woman (the average man can, potentially, have unlimited offspring, whereas the average woman can really only have maybe 20-30 children, maximum). 

Wow.  That doesn't seem to work out for the whole, couple-thing, now does it? 

Well, luckily, two things: 

1)  We are not slaves to our biological nature.

2)  While men want to make lots of mini-me's, they also want them to survive...which often means sticking around and taking care of them.

So, we're doing pretty good, so far, right?

Well, biological nature aside, men still want to have sex with a lot of women, and women still want to find the one mate (that is not to say women want to be blushing virgins, but it's generally in their interest to sleep with men who might potentially be a long-term mate).

But, in today's world, society tells us that men and women are exactly the same.  Of course, by "exactly the same," society actually means that men are men and women should strive to be exactly like men.  That is, women should aim for lots of no-strings-attached sex, the way men do.

As a result, more and more of us are viewing sex the way that men do.  Is this a problem, you ask? 

I don't know -- you tell me, is this a problem?

It used to be that, in order to get anywhere with a girl, a guy had to go all out:  flowers, candy, creative and fun dates, fancy dinners, dressing up, love songs, poetry, and all that fun romantic stuff. Guys worked hard to create an atmosphere and comfort level in which a woman would...put out.

But now, he can meet her in a bar, maybe buy her a drink (usually not necessary), and take her home. 

Not necessarily a bad thing -- guys are getting more sex, girls are getting more sex, it's more straightforward, and guys keep their money.

But don't you feel like the romance is dead?

Photo credit:  Info Barrel

Defending a woman's right to tease

So here’s the story; I’m at the apartment of a boy I’d been dating for about a month. Things are heating up, so I think it only fair to warn him, before we get too far into the moment: “I’m not going to sleep with you tonight.”

“Okay,” he replies in stride and goes back to kissing me.

The next day he asks me if I’m waiting until marriage.

“Um…no,” I assure him, “Sex is just…kind of a big deal to me.”

“Oh,” he replies, “Yeah. I feel that.”

Well, apparently he doesn’t “feel that” because the next time I ask him to come over he hems and haws before remarking that I am a tease and he has a paper to write.

My first response? Um…asshole? But then I think about it for a moment—am I a tease?
Later that day, I am at dinner with my friend Max, relating the insulting story over sushi and sake. Max nods along sympathetically before informing me that, after a month, he is, in fact, surprised I haven’t slept with the guy yet.

“Excuse me?! We’ve been on six dates, I don’t see him during the week, and the only reason I know his birthday is because Facebook reminds me! I’m sorry, I just don’t think I know him well enough,” I mutter through a mouthful of avocado roll.

“Well, what, aren’t you attracted to him?” Max asks. “Are you going to sleep with him? Because otherwise, aren’t you just dangling something in front of him?”

Okay, so this is the second time I’ve been called a tease within a single week. Perhaps it’s time to really think about what a tease is. Am I one, and if so, then… what’s the crime?

As far as I’m aware, if you sleep with a guy you’ve just met, you’re either drunk, or at least a little on the slutty side. And if you don’t do anything with a guy you’ve been dating for a month, well, then you must be a prude. Neither choice will help your reputation. And if you have, well, a little bit of fun, but you refuse to go all the way…then you’re a tease.

So where do you draw the line? Where in that equation do I get to be a normal girl who just wants to know the guy more than “just sort of” before she sleeps with him? What am I supposed to do in this situation—not touch him at all, for fear that he might get turned on and then I’ll end up leaving him all…you know? I don’t know about you, but it kind of feels like anything short of going for the main event brands me with a scarlet “T” for Tease.

Damned if we do, damned if we don’t. Bottom line: In guys’ eyes we’re sluts or teases. The way we look, sound, smell, feel and touch—it’s all (supposedly) calculated to turn a man on. Maybe that’s why some cultures choose to hide their women indoors, or under a head-to-toe cloak.

Well, I have a better solution; Guys…man up!

If I don’t want to sleep with you, it’s not an insult to your masculinity. It’s not even that I don’t find you attractive. And it’s not that I just want to string you along. Maybe my mother taught me to be a good girl. Maybe that lesson took. Get to really know the guy first, you know? Be comfortable with what you do with your body.

And if we girls have to choose from the slut at one end, or the prudish princess at the other or maybe some playful teasing in the middle while we think it over, I say teasing is the way to go. No giving it up right away and no sitting at home for the rest of your life with your cats. There is a third option. Call me “respectable.” I can handle it.

Originally published in The New York Resident, The New Black Magazine, and NYU Livewire, February 2008