This goes under the fucking duh! category:

Dating experts outline seven match areas to consider:

Physical appearance
While physical appearance and attraction draw two people together at first, these aspects will affect the rest of their lives. If working out and staying fit is important to you, will it bum you out if your mate doesn’t share your quest for rock hard abs?

Emotional maturity
Is this person emotionally mature and centered or are they still lugging around some trunk-sized baggage? How does your sweetheart relate to family and friends? Is he or she emotionally supportive or have control issues? Is your mate aware of his or her own issues and interested in addressing them?

Lifestyle choices
This includes career and social lives, common interests, leisure time activities and energy levels. Would she rather join the bowling league or the metropolitan symphony? Does he have lots of energy for activities with friends while she’d rather rest and chill out at home?

Financial style
This is a hot bed for most couples. It includes income levels, financial goals and views on handling money. How do you each want to spend, save and invest? Is one person a spender while the other saves? Is one person financially responsible while or the other plays catch-up with child support and bills?

Value structure
This match area is often overlooked but has a tremendous impact on your life. It includes the big values: honesty, integrity, loyalty, views on family and children, religion and spirituality, life goals and the treatment and care for others. Does your mate follow through on their word? Would you say he’s trustworthy? Will she always be there for you in a pinch?

Marriage and sex
Everyone does not share the same idea of marriage. The big questions to address are: What do you and your mate expect from marriage and sex? Is he or she looking for a soul mate? Do you both want close intimacy in friendship, communication and sex?

Intelligence
Having similar education levels increases your chances of sharing matching school and social experiences, intellectual interests and career goals. What topics do you and your honey like to talk about? Conversation limited to sports or shopping may get boring to someone who likes to ponder philosophy and bluster about business.

Paul is right to challenge my interchangeable use of games and rules, but this site is intended, after all to spark some heated discussion. That said, games as Paul discusses them suck. This is not exactly what I took from those many many many Match profiles that said "NO GAMES," but on second thought this is probably what each person who wrote that meant. I was mainly looking for a segueway to get Paul and I bantering over dating rituals...hmm...I should try harder next time. Paul makes some excellent points, but the best point he makes is that rules are comforting to many people because they give the illusion, or the hope that if we follow them we should/will win. Games and rules both distance themselves from the ideas of chemistry and compatibility that should supercede whether someone walked on the outside of the sidewalk.

Games. AAAAAAAAAAAAA!! GAMES!!!!!
I think the reason people fear games is that they're not serious enough. Men don't want to be hurt, or to waste their time, or to be made to seem the fool. Women don't want to be treated flippantly, lose their heart unfairly, or to get played. In other words, men and women often want the same thing.

To be left alone.

No, wait, that's not it. To be serious--if possible--the reason we don't like "Games" is that we don't like the idea that we might not be taken to be a real human being, to be a serious individual with a real agenda (and not an agenda in the "ulterior motives" sense; I mean in the "life plan" sense). No one wants to be the clown in the circus of life.

When we invoke games, we think of Monopoly, baseball, or chess--life and death struggles for money, power, domination, et cetera, that, as soon as they're done, are a joke. You shake the other team's hand, the bankrupt guy may have more money for dinner than the millionaire, and the king may be dead, but you can always play again. No one wants to be treated as flippantly as that.

We are human, though, and humans often crave structure in life. Some would argue that this is why humans have religions; because they need an enforcer saying "Thou Shalt Not" to monitor everyday life. We want the right rules enforced, not the bogus ones. We want the person inviting the other to dinner to pay, to hold the door, to plan the night out. We want both to say if they are or aren't interested in the other. That's just how we are.

I think Erin is wrong to conflate the idea of rules with games. We want rules--rules provide order, some certainty, some sense that you'll win if you follow them. In other words, rules are a comfort blanket. Games on the other hand, smack of repeated iterations of the scenario, not one of which matters. In other words, we balk at the potential of our own inability to matter.

That said, I think there is also a difference between the games and the rituals. I think that those who are bad at the rituals--those who come on too strong or too weak, those who don't hold a door if they need to, or those who don't brush their teeth before a date--are likely to be the ones frustrated by those who cling to the dating rituals. These are the people who I think Erin is referring to as being "bad at the game". It's not so much that this stuff is trivial, but that it is nuanced and seems minute and possibly trivial.

So if you're railing at the game, I think what you need to find out is if it's the player or the game.

This past year both Paul and I were members of Match.com, hunting down dates via the internet. Needless to say, neither of us had much luck finding Mr./Ms. Right, however I did find a few Mr. Right Nows. But I digress. While scrolling through all of the postings, you see a lot of the same shit over and over again. Headlines that read "I've never done this before," or "Don't tell my friends I'm on here," etc. However, there was one such stupid phrase that annoyed me above all others. "No games." Why would this annoy me? Because you can't avoid playing games in some capacity, and it seems that people who blatantly say this might be not as good at the game as they would like and simply write it in frustration. What they fail to realize is that in some capacities, games or having game are very helpful in dating, because they let you know what to expect from your prospective partner and how to react to it. All the games that I have ever played, from volleyball to Monopoly to dating, have rules. Rules are key. The problem is that most people don't know what the rules of dating are, and they certainly don't obey them a lot of the time. If everyone knew and obeyed a set of basic guidelines for dating (I believe that people used to do this in the 1950s and before...I am not suggesting that we play by those rules, but that we make up a set of our own that are relevant now) there would be much less ambiguity, people would be less frustrated, less confused, and wouldn't waste as much time.

Q: Why are women evil?
A: Because they have the power to hurt men.

Erin on Lying
Men are bad liars and women are fairly good ones. The reasons for lying run along the same lines that Paul suggested; women want to build the egos of the men in their lives, they don't want to hurt anyone's feelings, they want to make others feel good. On the other hand, women try to cover their asses as much as any man, and are quite adept at this. For example: your girlfriend wants to have dinner with her ex-boyfriend. Knowing that you will be uncomfortable with this, and rightly so, she uses ambiguity as her ally and makes you believe that she is meeting a girlfriend. "I am having dinner with an old friend from college," conveniently leaving out the fact that they used to screw each other daily.

On second thought, maybe it isn't that women are good liars, but that men WANT to believe the line that they are being fed. Who doesn't want to believe that they are the best that the other person has had, or that she really is meeting a girlfriend even though she wore her sexiest panties and heels. Women tend to be MUCH more suspicious than men, always secondguessing and doubting men's motivations and overanalyzing everything a man says. This leads to overreacting in situations when nothing happens, but occasionally we are right, leading us to believe that men lie more often than they probably do.

One problem for men is that they seem to tell outright lies, rather than merely using artful dodging as women often do, they will blatantly lie, saying "I am going out with the guys tonight, so we can't have dinner," when in reality he is having drinks with that cute girl from his office. Since he is sure nothing will happen, he figures his girlfriend doesn't need to know. I don't believe that men lie maliciously though, maybe because they are simple creatures and don't think this way.

One thing that Paul didn't address was how the sexes get caught lying in different ways. Men get caught in their lies much more often than women do, and when confronted with their lies, their stories break down. They need to take a lesson from women when it comes to getting caught. Temper tantrums are the way to make someone feel like an ass for questioning anything you say. Or, you can take the opposite route, break down in tears and say "Don't you trust me? I trust you!" Men just kind of stand there, apologizing, which is basically admitting that they lied and that they knew they shouldn't have done what they did.

Do men lie more than women think? Are they better at not getting caught than I think? If they are good at it, women would have no way of knowing...kind of the way that men don't usually realize that women are damn good liars.

Variations on a Theme; or, Why do we Lie?

Although the original topic by our reader was "Why are women evil", I'm going to take it in a slightly more neutral direction, and discuss why it is that each of the genders lie to the other. We all do it, every day, to lots of people, for a whole hell of a lot of reasons. Sometimes it's entirely necessary, it's true. In relationships, it can be both the magic glue and the less-magic hammer, depending on the style and caliber of the lie. Your hips may not look slim, but we're not going to tell you---that's fine, even expected. Your hips don't look slim, so I'm having an affair with your sister--not so fine, not so expected, and a rather substantial lie.

It's my contention that most males and most females lie for entirely different reasons. The female role (if we are to believe stereotypes that sometimes help) is to nurture and protect. This is why the major lies from the female side of the relationship tend to be about the male ego. No, honey, it's okay, it happens to everyone sometimes, it isn't a big deal. Yes, you're the best I've ever had. No, I think you're far more intelligent than he is. You deserve the job. And so on and so forth.

The male psyche, however, seems to be stereotypically incompetent with regard to comfort. Apparently we just don't do it as well as we should. Our lies, instead, seem to be defensive mechanisms to keep from getting hurt. Men lie to keep from being maced or emasculated, to escape injury from that proverbially scorned woman's fury. We conceal the beer on our breaths, the lipstick on our cheeks, the emptiness in our wallets, and we do it not because we are afraid of hurting our partner's feeling, but because we don't want to hurt our own "feeling" things.

Is that necessarily true, though? Is it at all possible that men lie this way so that they don't hurt the woman's feelings for acting like, well, men? Is it possible that on some level, we don't want to tell the girl that she's bad in bed, that her sister is more attractive than she is, simply for the reason we don't want to hurt them? It seems that biologically, we have an imperative to have sex with lots of women, but then protect them from the wild and themselves so our progeny can be born. Is it possible, then, that the male lie is meant to protect and defend each woman with whom a particular man has had sex?

I suppose I've taken this far afield, and I leave it to my good associate to take up another or correlative position on the matter. As always, we welcome your opinions.

Although this site is supposed to be high-powered sparring between the sexes, Paul is absolutely right. But Paul, where do we find enough of these mythical creatures you call men to go around? Especially at Andrea's age!!! And I do live by my distinction....I specifically referenced boys throughout my last post, while referring to Andrea as a woman. This was certainly intentional, although perhaps not carried far enough. I relented a little, but perhaps unfairly stated that MEN don't get subtlety....maybe I should replace all mention of men with boys...hmm...

Jane, you ignorant slut...
Actually, Andrea, Erin, and any other woman who may be reading: there is a key distinction that Erin brought up and then failed to live by. Many of the males in high school, college, and well into the working world are boys, playing at being a man. There are few "men". I'm sorry, that's just the way it is, fellas. Most of the stuff that ladies, women, girls, females of all varieties complain about and belittle "men" for is directly attributable to the immaturity and idiocy of males that can only be described as boys.

They are boys, plain and simple.

Men don't play games. Men don't treat you badly. Men don't lie, cheat, steal, or lust after your best friends (unless you do). Men are polite, generous, honest, caring, and loyal. The problem is, in our world, there are very few men out there. Some men even hide behind a shield of quasi-boyhood, but the fact remains that all the bogus behavior that you bemoan (rightly) is that of boys.

So the short answer is that you need to be aware of this crucial distinction, and choose accordingly. The boys are the ones many of you date. The men are the ones you want to date and want to keep.

Dear Andrea,
Now that I have let the men have their say, it is time for me to chip in and give it to you straight. As someone who had a lot (perhaps too much) success with dating in high school, I have to say that a HUGE factor (I cannot stress this next point enough) is how (im)mature boys (I dare not even say men) are in high school (actually, I don't know when this particular phenomenon is supposed to end...midlife???). Through no fault of their own, men's sexual peaks are inversely proportional to how mature they are, meaning that during high school they are idiots. One problem that you may be facing is that you are a woman who knows what you want. You may be ready for a mature relationship, but honey, the truth is that most of the boys in your life probably don't have the first clue about what they want, so how can you know what to do to give it to them (and I don't mean sex...although, in high school this is probably a priority for most boys)? Occasionally I have taken it upon myself to inform my particular objet d'amor what it is that he wants (and more specifically that it is me) but you have to know 100% what his response will be before using this particular approach. Mostly I would suggest trying a few simple things that tended to work for me in high school (they tend to apply less as I get older and deal with older guys):

1. Operation Infiltration: Guys have to feel comfortable with you. This is KEY. In high school it often helps to be friends/friendly with someone you hope to date. Be a good listener, and also take a risk by opening up a little. This will help both of you get past any awkwardness that would come of asking each other out. Once you have this firmly in place and have become his confidant move on to step 2.

2. Operation Go ahead and ask the guy out:...but be CAREFUL. Invitations that come from left field are often unsuccessful, so try to work this into a conversation about dating, people you have a crush on, etc. Don't be afraid to be obvious. Men DO NOT understand the finer points of subtlety AT ALL. While you may feel like you are being overly blatant, that is what it takes sometimes.

3. Another KEY POINT is that the feelings obviously have to be mutual, but there are ways to test for this. Go to a movie together or do something else where if you were tired it would be normal to put your head on his shoulder, do it and see what happens. There are tons of ways to assess this. If he talks to you about girls he likes, chances are he isn't interested. Likewise, don't talk about boys you are interested in, because he will get the wrong idea. Making guys take notice of you sexually by broadcasting other exploits always, and I mean always, backfires and gets you landed in friendsville.

4. Try to date older men if you can handle it (not for the naive). They tend to be a little more mature, but you might not notice :) The ideal thing is to date someone who has had a prior relationship of some endurance.


I would totally love to give you more tips, but I don't want to broadcast my total arsenal as prospective dates might view this page. However, feel free to email me at ekmurray@hotmail.com, and I will give you a better scoop :)

Another Male Perspective....
Paul's cousin, Graham, has decided to weigh in with some further advice to Andrea. Please enjoy...
In response to Andrea's query about how to handle dealing with guys, I think we are less looking at a fear issue (someone that self confident is past that) and more at a "what are they (guys) thinking?" I could totally be in the wrong here, but that's the impression I am getting... [I was actually trying to get at a more generalized dating tactic, though you're right, the question was phrased more about what are guys thinking. -ed.]

I would first say that as silly as this sounds, everyone reacts differently to different things, and that an approach that works on one person may not be suited to the person sitting in the desk next to them. I realize this may be blatantly obvious to some, but quite often, we find a groove that works for us and we try to replicate it. Under this umbrella of thought, Mr. Rogers was right, "everyone is special." The tough part is figuring out who is right for you.

Leading into the topic just mentioned, alot of the time, we go after what we "think" we want and what we "think" will make us happy. I am not saying that these urges which lead to romances are bad, just that we need to recognize what's the real thing and what is "pining
brought to fruition." We all go after people, but one must realize that while some people like to be pursued, maybe there is an underlying reason that we are the ones doing the pursuing.

Underlying all of this is our gut. It's there for a reason. Listen to it. We always know when something feels right or not. Yeah, there can be some awkwardness in the beginning trying to get to know the person across the dinner table from us, but if it's right, those butterflies ought to leave our stomach pretty quickly (and hopefully not onto our date).

For some concrete advice, I would love it of Andrea could give us some examples. Primary source material always makes advice a bit easier to construct (generalities are the bane of advice's existence; just read the first three paragraphs here). Hope this could be of some assistance and we all look forward to dissecting the dating world here further.

Paul on the non-returned phonecalls
Speaking as one who has been in this position, it's not fun to be in, there's no doubt. The fact is that a lot of people out there just don't have any manners. Occasionally I'm among them, but I try to make it a point to call anyone who calls me back. (this of course excepts telemarketers, parents leaving short messages that don't require replies, and the like). Frankly, some people are just rude and they don't know how to handle the fact that you might like them.

For me, for example, I once was dating this girl, and I think we were both not totally down with the relationship. One of us was moving away, and as the departure date grew closer, we felt less and less need to spend time with each other (this, it is admitted, was after 3 dates or so). She called me, and I was very busy, but I called back. She never did. I'm not holding it against her, since I agreed it was short and not really happening, but the point I'm getting at is that some people feel it is best to end a relationship by ignoring it, and I think that's wrong.

Aside from the manners thing--and don't get me started on people thinking that my manners come from having gone to high school in Texas--I think that the ignoring thing is just a bad call for the ignorer, let alone the ignoree. The ignorer subjects herself to continued calls because she hasn't had the forthrightness to say she didn't think it was working out, and hoping it will just resolve itself on its own. This probably causes more anguish for them than necessary, because they keep hoping it'll go away, and they keep hoping this call isn't going to be the person again, and on and on it goes.

The other side of that coin is that people use a lack of returned phone calls in a purely selfish fashion, to keep someone on a string or to build up their own ego. I knew a girl who would ignore calls and emails for weeks at a time, and then just as her suitor was about to call her up and give her what-for and tell her to get lost, she would do something to draw them back in. Some people just get off on it, and that's just wrong.

Is it a gendered thing, though? The bogus "I'll call you" notwithstanding, since it's pretty much a social form by now, do men do this any more or any less than women?

Abandon Fear, All Ye Who Enter Here: Paul's Perspective, such as it is...This is in response to our faithful reader Andrea, who has been with us since the beginning. Way to go for being here all 2 weeks!

Andrea, it should be noted, is a high school senior, and said that she believed that she was rather attractive and was still having problems with the guys. I am going to assume that Andrea is not lying, particularly for the following reasons: she has self-confidence, and in a high schooler, that's awfully rare. Additionally, she's obviously smart--no, actually, because it doesn't do well to insult the readership. And finally because there are plenty of attractive people without dates--and plenty of uglies with them--so the theory works any way you like.

Nevertheless, back to the topic at hand. High school--and indeed the dating world in general--isn't easy. Perhaps it gets easier with time, but I don't think it's because rejection or heartbreak are any different as a 60 year old or a 16 year old. One of our other readers called her dating life (which to me seems relatively normal) a Jackson Pollock painting, full of color and confusion; "a fast-paced, colorful mess".

What I think is equally good advice for the old and young, male and female alike is something like a paraphrase of FDR--the only thing you should do is have no fear. It's not to say that fear is unnatural, or that you should hide your fear, but just to avoid having it.

Look: fear submerged only comes out in other places: inappropriate jokes, nervous laughter, uptightness, distraction, and the like. All of these are things that are horrible during a date, and could be fatal if you're trying to introduce yourself to someone. You could say the wrong thing, laugh at the wrong place, or spill your drink. You could become haughty or reserved, obnoxiously gregarious, or any number of different masks we all put on to avoid being afraid or alone. Despite our greatest self-delusions, none of us is good enough to perfectly hide that we are nervous. It just doesn't happen, and as a result, people do end up seeing through it.

Instead, abandoning fear can be a healthy thing for both men and women. Of course, foolhardiness isn't highly recommended either--asking the groom if he'd fancy a date next week is generally bad manners, but also sets you up for more than a little disappointment. But don't take that to mean that you shouldn't try to ask out people who you might think to be "out of your league." You never know until you play against them. And you will never do that until you abadon fear.

This sounds like some wacky action/adventure mantra, but it really does have practical benefits, particularly in the real world of the dating scene. When you're first asking someone out, you have to be absolutely open to the fact that the time might not be right for them (and therefore you). If you ask them, and they say no, then you're out what, 4 minutes? Not a lot of time. And if you don't worry about it exhaustively, you're in a position to move right on.

Some people are able to collect many numbers in a bar on any given night. It's because they're willing to just ask, they don't fear a "no" and they don't fear a "yes". Of course you can hope that the someone says yes, but you don't have to get all freaked out about it. Nor do you have to get freaked out about a date. Or saying no to a date. The whole purpose of a date is to find out if you like that other person. If you already know the answer's no, then you should tell them as much.* And you shouldn't fear the response. They'll date again, they'll ask for other numbers, and they'll get over it; so will you, if you are in their position. Sure, it may be hard, but in the long run, you're a better person for trying something new or ending something old.

Even on the date, I think trying to do away with fear can be a fearsomely liberating experience. You can learn a lot about yourself on a bad, madcap, or innovative date. Even if you don't like the person, it might help you out to find out more about yourself as a person. My worst date, well, that's a story for another time, but it was pretty funny to those involved, years later.

This is probably a bit freewheeling, but then, the question was a bit broad. If you have more questions directed at particular aspects of the dating life, drop us a line.

* note that I did not say "Be rude to them". There is no need to be anything less than kind but firm.

Lisa (a friend of both Paul and Erin) suggested some comical names:
Battle of the Bulge
Your Gender Sucks
Young, Horny and Clueless