Wonders never cease

From today's Ask Amy:

Dear Amy: I'm a 44-year-old single woman in a major metropolitan area.

I have a good life with great friends and a solid job.

The problem is that I think I may be too old to find love.

I stopped dating several years ago because I was having a bad time of it.

Lots of guys seemed to care more about their feelings than mine. It just got too hard. I also started gaining weight and dealing with my elderly parents and their health issues, so it was easy to forget about dating.

Things settled down with the family, and I started caring about my body more and losing weight, so that's improved. But I don't even know how to go about dating at this age. Everyone around me is married, gay or much younger than I, and I'm starting to believe I've missed this boat completely.

I hate to think my love life is over. Any advice?

—Lost

Dear Lost: It helps to approach dating the way the Democratic presidential candidates have attacked the primaries—with a relentless confidence (but no negative attacks, please).

The most efficient way to meet people your age is through online sites. The pool of prospective parties is large, and you can find people with common interests.

Use these experiences as a way to meet new people and brush up your interpersonal skills. Meet as many people as possible, but only for coffee at first. Be open but discerning.

Attend cultural events, galleries and lectures, not solely as a way to meet guys but also because exposure to art, music and learning is stimulating and gets you outside of yourself.

I know it's a cliche, but before you find love, it helps to know and love yourself. You're not too old. He's out there. You just need to meet him.

Huh.

What do you know? Amy actually advocated internet personals & dating sites. I never thought I'd see the day. She's been so wildly paranoid and suspicious of meeting people on the internet in the past. Clearly, she's watched way too much Dateline NBC.

One minor quibble, if only because I can't comment on Amy's stuff without picking on her: That last line bothers me. "He's out there. You just need to meet him." That sounds suspiciously like destiny / love-at-first-sight / there's-someone-for-everyone / soulmate garbage. I don't believe in that crap.

There's no magic to falling in love and there's not one mysterious, faceless person out there who is destined to be your one and true love. Love is work. I'm not saying you can find it with just anyone, but I am saying that Hollywood romances have conditioned people to believe in a type of love that doesn't exist.

Say it, Amy: A-B-U-S-E

From today's Ask Amy:

Dear Amy: My 21-year-old daughter is living with a 45-year-old man.

She graduated from college early and was so driven until she met him.

She moved out of our house because we didn't agree with this relationship. We wanted to meet and talk to this man, but he said he would not let us control him and that he would decide when it was time to meet.

That was six months ago. She had never really had a boyfriend before. They met when she joined a women's sports team that he coaches.

I know she is an adult, but she gave up so much for this guy.

I have gone to see her games, but he never talks to me or looks at me. She says he is nice, but he let her sit at a job interview for three hours because he wanted to rotate the tires on his truck. She does not have a car. She said he would co-sign a loan for her, but it hasn't happened.

I talk to her every once in a while, but she has not been home since she left because he won't bring her here. We live about 40 minutes away.

Do I just have to sit and wait this out? We had always been a close family, but now she ignores her dad and me.

—Helpless

Dear Helpless: Do not sit and wait this out.

You should do everything possible to maintain contact with your daughter.

Even though you don't approve of this relationship, you and your husband should still be active parents, encouraging her to find employment and helping her with transportation. You should offer to co-sign a loan for her so she will have a car; otherwise, it is going to be difficult for her to get and maintain a job, friendships and her relationship with you. Offer to pick her up if she's interested in visiting.

Please try to keep your daughter connected.

For fuck's sake. Does Amy not recognize the signs of an abuser? How the hell did she get this gig, anyway? Win it in a cereal box giveaway?

They met when she was a member of a team he coached. Imbalance of power.

He refuses to meet the parents because he won't let them "control" him. Issues with control.

He makes her sit on her ass and wait while he gets his tires rotated and won't take her to see her parents. Control freak.

It's an abusive relationship, Amy. All that's missing are the pit stains, the black eyes, and Ike Turner. The rest is right there for you. Call it what it is.

Geez, it's been almost two weeks since I posted

Better get crackin'. From last week's Hax chat on the subject of asking a 38 year-old woman whether she was the mother of the toddler in front of her:

Older Mom: C'mon -- I thought your answer to the older mom (38 at her child's birth) was a little hard on the bystanders. It's not "rude and deeply personal" to say, at the park or something, "Oh, is that your grandson? What a cutie! How old is he?" or something to that effect. People ask me, in the same passing way, whether I'm my son's mom all the time, as a prelude to asking the usual questions about him. The fact that I'm 30 and my son is 2 doesn't make the question any less "personal"; it just means that I'm not over-sensitive about this.

Carolyn Hax: Ah, but they're asking if you're the -mom.- Which is still personal, frankly--people really do need to figure out that their curiosity is not grounds in itself for asking a question of a stranger--but it at least takes the edge off the rudeness. If you're just trying to make polite conversation, then make it polite. Such as, "What a cutie. What brings you out on this nice/cold/warm/rainy day?" What does it matter what the relationship is? I say this as a skeptic of ridiculous sensitivities--people really do need to ask themselves occasionally whether their "usual questions" are rude. So many of them are.

. . . .

Rude Questions: Carolyn - I love you. But really, sometimes you can just be so prickly. While I get that I'm not someone who is personally bugged by people asking me somewhat personal questions, I can't help but feel like people just sometimes need to get over themselves. We live in a society and we interact. A person with a child tends to be related to that child. I don't think I should have to make sure to strip my casual comments/questions of any inference of a relationship. Kudos to those who automatically think/talk that way - but the thought of expending those mental gymnastics on the off chance someone can't just a grip is really exhausting.

Carolyn Hax: Point taken, but I actually am not personally bugged by most questions, either. It is the pervasive, persistent distress that people have aired in this forum over the years that has converted me. I'm not advising people to tiptoe through every situation, and I even said in that post that oversensitivity is a problem in itself.

However, I don't see how anyone suffers if we all run our "standard" questions through a rude-o-meter. Once. Check your need to know against the net effect of everyone's need to know on everyone else over a lifetime. Sure, your friendly inquiry may be well-meaning, even harmless in itself. But you have to consider what that inquiry would feel like if you got it 80, 200 times a year--because that's the position some people are in.

Idle curiosity used to have an invisible lid on it, but when society undertook a purge of a lot of needless shame that had accumulated over the years, it also blew that lid off with it. And so people don't stop themselves from asking just about anything, when in fact it would be to everyone's benefit if they did.

Again--don't tiptoe. Just think hard, once, about the kind of things you do ask, of whom, and whether you have any business asking them, and whether you could be just as friendly and interested if you backed off a bit on the details. I'm urging mindfulness, not launching a social censorship campaign.

So are the questions just nosy and rude or should people just lighten the hell up, already?

There are different ways to ask the same question that won't cause as much offense. For instance, "Are you thirsty?" as opposed to "What are you, retaining water?" Why even go there at all? Why not just presume that this old hag with the surely-barren womb is indeed the delightful little angel's mother? If you're wrong, no one would really take offense, would they? In fact, if this woman really is as haggardly ancient and decrepit and some people seem to think she is (not that the Huckster's defensive about 38 being old or anything), the assumption should serve as a compliment, no?

Just err on the side of caution, is all I'm saying. Not too long ago, the Huckster was sitting at one of those overly-crowded plastic picnic tables inside Costco eating a slice of pizza with his son. A Caucasian dude, probably in his late 40s, maybe early 50s, comes by and asks to share our table. The Huckster says "Sure," because I'm all magnanimous like that.

The guy goes off to fetch his food, and then a little Asian girl (about 9 years old) wanders over, looking confused. Asian girl. Caucasian dude. BUT THE HUCKSTER DOES NOT WILT UNDER PRESSURE. Oh, no. "Are you looking for the seats your daddy saved for you, honey?" he asked. The Huckster likes to call all little girls "honey." More pedo-phantastic that way. "Yes," she says and sits down next to us. Minutes later, the Caucasian dude joined her.

I AM A HUMANITARIAN.

It's all fun and games until someone pokes you in the cooter.

Today's "Tales from the Front" tells the story of "Friendly Wife," who is married to "Dylan" and remains close friends with two of her exes, "Ollie" and "Jude." Friendly Wife introduced Jude to a high school friend of hers. They hit it off and are now married. Ollie has been less lucky in love and tells Friendly Wife that she's the one who got away. Friendly Wife doesn't see anything wrong with her friendship with Ollie because she thinks he "lost a lover but gained a sister," and besides she says, "I'm in a secure relationship with my Dylan, and we have the most fun any couple can have. He has no reason to worry."

You know what? The second Friendly Wife and Dylan stop having "the most fun any couple can have," the very moment their marriage goes through one of those trouble patches that every normal, healthy marriage goes to, 10-to-1 says Ollie goes from "being there" for Friendly Wife to just being there. (I watch too much Seinfeld in syndication.)

I think it's great if you're friendly to and close with your exes. It demonstrates a level of emotional maturity for a romantic relationship to make the transition into a genuine friendship. But if one of those former partners is still openly pining for the other? That's just begging for disaster, isn't it?

I don't care how clear Friendly Wife makes it to Ollie that she's in love with her husband. The moment Ollie sense that Friendly Wife's marriage is in trouble, he's all over her like a fried egg on a bowl of Bibimbop (thanks, Colbert!). And if the marriage is in enough trouble, you really don't need that added complication.

Those precocious little angels would never tell a lie.

From today's "Ask Amy":

Dear Amy: My boyfriend and I were watching my 5-year-old niece. She came to me and told me that my boyfriend said he was going to punch her in the nose. I know that when my boyfriend is playing with the kids he plays around and says things, but he is adamant that he didn't say that.

I spoke with my niece's parents, and we chalked it up as a misunderstanding.

But now my boyfriend does not want her playing with him, and he refuses to watch her unless someone is with him every minute.

He is in law enforcement and says he sees things like this all the time, situations in which a kid accuses an adult of doing something and the adult gets in trouble. His exact words were, "God forbid she said I touched her."

I don't know how to get him to understand that she is a 5-year-old kid with a vivid imagination, and I feel this might be the end of our relationship.

—Helpless and Clueless

Dear Helpless: Most of what young children say has some basis in reality. You should believe your niece but also assume that perhaps your boyfriend was horsing around and that his statement was taken out of context.

Your boyfriend is the adult in this scenario, and it is his job to put things in perspective.

Being in law enforcement, he should be more—not less—understanding about this incident. The fact that he is so punitive and blames a 5-year-old for this incident highlights his own immaturity.

I do agree with him about this one thing, however: He should not be alone with your niece because he can't be trusted to treat her well.

Oh, for f#%^$ sake, Amy, you're just proving the dude's point. Since when are children considered little paragons of virtue, unable to tell anything but the truth? Are they incapable of lying? I'm not talking about embellishing the truth, I'm talking about outright lying. Is that really so unheard of? Come on. The guy's fears -- while a tad paranoid -- are understandable.

My niece and son were sitting on the living room sofa watching The Cat in the Hat one Saturday morning a couple of years ago. I go out to walk the dogs and come back to find my son sitting on the floor, rubbing his head, crying. I ask what happened. My son says his cousin hit him. I ask my niece if this was true. She says she didn't, that he just fell.

Eventually (after getting my sister-in-law involved), my niece admits she hit him, but that was because they were watching a scene in The Cat in the Hat where the kids were hitting each other and supposedly my son thought it looked like fun and asked his cousin to hit her. So she did.

So we review the movie. No such scene.

Lookit Amy, a kid, lying! No basis in reality whatsoever. Some kids lie. Hate to break it to you, but there it is. Not all of them of course, but some. By assuming there was a basis in truth in the little girl's "He punched me in the nose" comment, Amy's just proving this guy's point. God forbid the little girl said he touched her no-no spot. Amy would assume there would be a kernal of truth to that, as well, and sic the cops on this guy.

This probably doesn't help . . . .

From today's Hax:

Carolyn:

I'm about 13 weeks pregnant with my first baby, VERY excited about the baby but panicking about the pregnancy itself. Stretch marks, weight gain, nausea, etc. It terrifies me that I won't recognize my body (and that my husband won't, either). Help!!

Early Pregnancy Freak-Out

At 13 weeks any nausea is behind you, so now it's about stretch marks, weight gain, heartburn.

It'll still be your body, though, and it's doing a very cool thing, so sit back and enjoy it (though eventually you may need a hand getting back up). I appreciate that the sh-word is evil, but your husband should appreciate your body's amazing and, honestly, beautiful transformation with you. The best way to ensure a mate does this is to choose a good one, and so I guess all you can do now is hope you did.

Your attitude will help, by the way, in the same way that a confident woman is prettier than one who is constantly worried about her butt size, even if Woman 2 has a smaller, shapelier butt. More magic, less takeover by alien being.

And stay away from freak-out-fueling pregnancy books and Web sites. Trust your OB and your judgment.

This probably doesn't help, but this letter reminded me of these two postcards from this week's PostSecret:




I'll never truly appreciate the sense of dread that a woman must fear upon becoming pregnant, both because I'll never be pregnant, but also because as a man, my sense of self-image was less dependent on my physical appearance (although it was still a factor) than a woman's self-image might be. That's just societal pressure coming to bear on young, impressionable girls.

Which is why if I ever have any daughters, I'm raising them to be bearded fat ladies at the circus freak show. Really, they're going to have my genes, so they're screwed from the get go. Why fight it?

Carolyn's so smart and sexay.

This is why Carolyn Hax is the best advice columnist out there. From Friday's Hax chat:

Secular Son in Potomac, Md.: My mother is very religious. Very, very religious. Very, very, very religious. (Dad was similarly devout, but passed away long ago.) I drifted away from the church when I was in high school and have no desire to find my way back and she knows this. When we get together for the holidays, the pre-meal prayer usually includes a word or fifteen about me finding my way back to church.

When my son was born eight years ago, my mother assumed there would be a baptism, in spite of the fact that she knew my wife and I don't attend church. (Yeah, I'm not sure how she thought that was going to happen, either.) My sister assumed there would be a baptism, as well. When I told my sister there wouldn't be, she responded melodramatically, "That's going to kill Mom. KILL HER."

Eight years later, we still haven't baptized our son and Mom is still alive and kicking. That said, she still insists on sending us "Purpose-Driven Life"-ish books on occasion. Earlier this week, Mom sent me an email containing a Bible verse she intended for me to read to my son. (That's not going to happen.)

Asking Mom to stop and reminding her of my choice to raise our son to be agnostic (not atheist) results in crying, wailing, and begging/pleading/nagging for me to go to church. Is ignoring her entreaties to come to Jesus really my only option here? I think it's rather rude and disrespectful to try and force one's religious beliefs on another, but obviously Mom doesn't agree.

Carolyn Hax: She's not going to stop. Presumably she feels she has a duty -not- to stop. So, yes, I think ignoring her entreaties really is the only option, since the alternatives are capitulation, which apparently isn't happening, or estrangement, which neither of you seems to want, which is promising.
I'm curious. How was a baptism to have been arranged, since your rejection of organized religion would have put you in a position either to lie, or to promise to raise your son according to beliefs in which you openly don't believe? Apparently Unitarian Universalist is an option, but are there others?

Unitarian what now? I've never even heard of that.

It should be a job qualification for advice columnists to know . . . stuff. Carolyn rules.

You pay for it one way or another.

From today's "Ask Amy":

Dear Amy: My son, a high school junior, was invited to the senior prom by a senior girl. They are casual friends, not boyfriend and girlfriend.

Prom tickets are $75 each. My son will be paying for his tux, flowers and a share of the limo. As it is her prom and she invited him, shouldn't she pay for his ticket?

—Perplexed Near Pittsburgh

Dear Perplexed: The person issuing the invitation—whether female or male—should pay for both tickets.

Sometimes, if they are going as friends, the offer to pay for both tickets is met with, "Oh, no—let's at least each pay our own way." This spreads the cost and keeps thing casual.

Proms are expensive. If it's any consolation to you, the girl's expenses will far exceed your son's.

Your son is gonna die alone, lady.

What the hell was that?

From today's "Ask Amy":

Dear Amy: This presidential campaign has gotten so stupid that I have decided your column is by far the most interesting thing in the paper, and so I have become a devoted reader. But I digress.

My father retired about 20 years ago, and until now he has been happily doing volunteer work.

He had a stroke last May. He walks about half as fast as he once did, and he seems to have trouble using the left side of his body. He was also diagnosed with diabetes.

He has moved from his apartment into a retirement home. He doesn't complain, but during my visit he didn't seem to enjoy himself. He still has an active mind—many of the other residents suffer from Alzheimer's disease or have been seriously impaired by strokes.

I live overseas and would move back right away, but I am seriously worried that if I move back I will have a hard time finding work. My dad says I shouldn't move.

At the same time, Dad seems about as happy in the retirement home as a cat is when bathed—in other words, not at all.

I don't want to bring him to live with me because we could not really provide him with the care he needs.

I need an objective viewpoint about what to do.

—Conflicted Son

Dear Conflicted: I agree that the dumber the political season gets, the more fascinating the real problems of real people seem.

I bet there is a way to improve your dad's quality of life. You should plan an extended visit so you can observe his situation over the course of a couple of weeks.

The retirement home might not be a good fit—or he might simply benefit from switching the location of his room to a section of the home where residents are less impaired.

You should work with the director of the home to see what they can do for him. Your father's health might improve if he has regular social and physical therapy.

Visit all of the assisted-living facilities in your father's area to see if there might be a better place for him. Also, contact his former volunteer coordinator and see if your father can continue his work there in some capacity.

Were the first paragraphs of the letter and Amy's response really necessary? What possible purpose did they serve? It wasn't funny, it didn't add anything to the discussion, it wasn't insightful, and it didn't even advance a particular policitcal view (assuming, of course, that you can't call "apathy and disinterest" a political view).

Amy sucks so much, I can't even begin to tell you.

What time is dinner?

From today's "Dear Abby":

DEAR ABBY: My husband and I haven't lived here very long. Our only company is a dear friend, "Sid," who lives nearby. I love to entertain and have guests over, so naturally I invite Sid to dinner quite often.
My problem is Sid never arrives on time for a meal. I usually have to tell him dinner will be ready an hour earlier than it really will be, so he'll show up before it is finished cooking.

I take pride in having everything ready at once for a large meal. When I must keep things warm for an hour or more extra, it not only ruins the mood but the food dries out. At Easter we had Sid over and told him dinner would be at 1 p.m. When I called him at 1:30, he told me he hadn't even showered or shaved yet to come over.

Is there a polite way to show my frustration at Sid's lack of punctuality, or should I stop inviting him to join us for meals? I don't want to be rude. -- FRUSTRATED IN THE KITCHEN

Huh.

I thought "dinner" referred to the evening meal. But dictionary.com says I'm wrong:

din·ner –noun
1. the main meal of the day, eaten in the evening or at midday.
2. a formal meal in honor of some person or occasion.
3. table d'hôte.

I guess all those people who invited me to Christmas "dinners" at 3 pm weren't crazy after all. I take back everything I ever said about you behind your backs.

Sure a sense of humor comes in handy once in a while, but every so often you need to flip people the bird.

A couple of letters today about couples who have their hands held out at their own weddings. First, from "Ask Amy" we have the ideal reaction. Keep a sense of humor and an open mind about things. Make things fun. Don't always try to see the worst in other people and assume that the bride and groom just want extra presents:

Dear Amy: I'm responding to letters from people who say they are angry about the "shakedown" many wedding showers have become. One writer was concerned because she had been asked not just to bring a gift but to bring a gift basket full of goodies.

Gift baskets can be inexpensive to put together. But there are many items at discount stores and "dollar stores" that would be fun and kitschy to include in a gift basket. People just need to be a little creative!

—Shower Veteran

Dear Veteran: I love your suggestion and agree that a personalized, kitschy gift basket can be quite inexpensive to put together—certainly less expensive than many of the items prospective brides and expectant mothers list on their registries.

Cool. Good.

But sometimes, people are just douchebags and don't deserve the pleasure of your company at their wedding. From today's "Dear Abby":

DEAR ABBY: Two friends of mine are being married. Their wedding will be a potluck. I have never heard of such a thing, and I'm wondering if this means I shouldn't bring a gift.

On top of bringing food, they have also assigned people to various tasks, such as setting up the hall, doing dishes, serving the cake and such. What does a wedding guest do in a situation like this? -- NOT SURE IF I DO

DEAR NOT SURE: It appears this affair is one in which an unusual amount of effort is expected of the "guests." Unless you are prepared to participate fully -- and that includes giving them a small wedding gift -- stay home and watch a rerun of "Father of the Bride."

I'm okay with the potluck (assuming, of course, that the bride and groom aren't registered at Tiffany's). It's the assigning of chores that I find pretty galling.

My thoughts exactly, Wolverine.

Fap fap fap fap fap

Today's Hax:

Carolyn:

I've been flirting with a guy for the past few months. He's been flirting with me, too. This week I just found out he's 22 -- I'm 32! Neither of us looks our age so it wasn't an issue until now. I think we both still find each other attractive. What are your thoughts on 22-year-old guy with 32-year-old gal? (We have business/education in common.)

Old-Age Dating . . .

Damn, that's hot . . . . :)

My initial thoughts are that your thoughts and his thoughts are the only thoughts that count.

This is even hotter. THIS is why I *heart* Carloyn.

I was about to type "But seriously . . .," when I realized there's really nothing to add. If age becomes an issue, then that just means you're not well matched -- the way any couple isn't well matched. Age doesn't determine maturity, values, interests, chemistry, timing; it merely contributes. Sometimes very little.

So, you get to know each other, you see what happens. A 10-year age difference between two legal adults adds no new feature to the usual weeding-out process.

Divorce and kids

From yesterday's "Ask Ellie":

Is it worse to separate from a partner you don’t love and upset your children, or better to stay together and be unhappy the rest of your life?

- Undecided

Divorce decisions are rarely black and white: Sometimes the children adjust and the parents go on to happier relationships; sometimes, the upheaval for everyone is harder than the family life that preceded it.

You must look at your own individual options more specifically and practically, and not try to make such generalized assumptions. A marriage is always worth giving your best shot before splitting… so, perhaps things would improve if you worked on making yourself happier within it, whether through individual counselling, getting out more with friends, taking courses, changing jobs, etc.

If nothing of the kind helps, then the next step involves talking to your partner about making potential changes together, or pursuing marital therapy.

But if splitting up is the final answer, then all of you including the children, should get some counselling help to adapt to the new situation.

Professional help isn’t a “trendy” approach… it’s a wise way to go through an emotional change with guidance and support. It will help you look at the question you asked, and recognize that only you can find the right answer that fits your own case.

I just want to add one vital bit of opinion that Ellie has failed to mention:

I believe that children will always be better off with happy divorced parents than with married parents who hate it each other.

There's a lot of grey area inbetween those two extremes, which makes divorce such a hard decision when children are involved. The best thing people can do in those situations is take our best guess and make the best of the situation.

Fail! Fail, fail, fail!!!

Ellie, you are SUCH A FAILURE:

Last year I met a man on a dating website; we developed an intense and satisfying relationship, but I soon suspected that he was hiding something.

After some digging, I discovered that he was married; his wife’s family co-owned his business; he’s having an affair with one of his employees, and dating another woman on the side (talk about busy.)

Even though I ended the relationship, I’m still mortified, not only because of his deceit, but also because we had unprotected sex.

I feel a lot of compassion for his wife. I’d like to tell her what’s going on behind her back, but I don’t know if I should.

- Wavering

You’d do a greater service to go on a talk show circuit – without naming the jerk – to alert hordes of women about the perils of NOT knowing enough about a man before plunging into intimacy. Not to mention the sheer recklessness of having unprotected sex!

As for spilling all to this one woman, his wife, forget it. She may know already that he’s a dog, or she may not. But your story from a stranger won’t necessarily be believed, and, Mr. Deceitful may be convince her you’re the one who’s lying.

Instead of seeking this route to revenge, seek a better way of looking after yourself.

A dating site only provides an introduction. The rest is up to you. After all, it only took “some digging” to find a whole lot of dirt on this guy.

ARE YOU KIDDING ME??? Your advice, completely straight-faced, is to NOT tell the wife that her husband's most likely having unprotected sex wtih multiple women? If "Wavering" had evidence that this man were a convicted murderer, would your advice be the same then, Ellie?

Oh, don't worry about the wife. Worry about your own self, girlfriend. She wouldn't believe you, anyway! Toodles!

*banging forehead on desk*

Have you considered the possibility -- nay, LIKELIHOOD -- that this man is exposing his wife to all sorts of godforsaken diseases? And it's not just the clap or HIV I'm talking about. Certain strains of something as "simple" as genital warts can increase the poor woman's chances of developing cervical cancer. Have you thought about that, Ellie, you rocket scientist?

Note that nowhere am I saying the philanderer should be exposed for being the cad that he is. Like I've said previously, I think that's a much harder decision to make.

But if you KNOW for a fact that this guy is having unprotected sex with other women (i.e. that's YOU, "Wavering"), you owe it to this other woman to let her know what her risks are. Put it like this: If you never said anything and this woman later contracted herpes or chlamydia or whatever, how would you live with yourself?

Damn, who knows where that guy's schmingie has been?

You suck.

Today's Hax has two letters in it, and Carolyn's responses to both of them left me thinking she's really quick to turn the finger of blame inward to the letter writer. Granted, she might not be off base at all, but
it just seemed like she went there on scant information.

First letter and part of the response:

Carolyn:

I have a friend who is pressuring me (and others) to fix her brother up on dates. He seems nice, but I know his story and it involves professional disgrace, financial problems and depression. None of us feels comfortable introducing this man to anyone. I've tried to put her off but she won't stop. She is blind about her brother and a real control freak. How can I get her to back off without telling her that her bro is a loser no one should date?

Crazed

Wow.

This reads like an advice columnist's philosophy exam: "Who's in worse shape, the loser, the myopic control freak sister who defends him or the person who befriends the myopic control freak sister yet plainly dislikes her?"

Are we really casting aspersions on people for the character flaws of their friends now? That seems a little overboard to me. There was no indiciation that "Crazed" was this woman's Maid of Honor or anything. They might just be acquaintances. Generally speaking, I don't think the flaws of one's friends should reflect poorly on a person at all. Even if they did, those character flaws reflect much more poorly on the friend than they do on a person who chooses to be the flawed person's friend.

Second letter and part of the response:

Carolyn:

What type of person thinks he never does anything wrong? After yet another argument with my boyfriend of 4 1/2 years, he called and asked if I was willing to change my behavior to make the relationship work. When I said of course and asked if he was willing as well, he said, "No, I think I am doing right by this relationship." How can he possibly think he does nothing wrong if we have had ongoing problems over the past few years?

B.

I'll bite. It's the type of person who thinks the other person will change and then everything will be perfect.

Upside: You two have more in common than you think.

I'm kind of left with the sense that today's two letter writers feel like they got punched in the mouth.

"B." never gave me the impression that she thought her boyfriend would change and then everything would be perfect. The only sense I got from that letter was that "B." wanted some indication that her boyfriend was willing to meet her halfway, and together, they would continue to work out their differences. There was no castle-in-the-sky, no happily-ever-after. Just the wish for a promise to work together.

I'm not feeling you today, Carolyn. This makes me sad.

Swing and a miss.

From today's "Ask Amy":

Dear Amy: My beautiful wife of seven years is a shopaholic. She literally can't go into a store and come out empty-handed.

We have plenty of children and grandchildren between us, so there are lots of potential recipients of her generosity. What complicates the matter is that she's the bigger breadwinner in the family. She earns about $15,000 more a year than I do. She works very hard, putting in lots of overtime, and I appreciate that.

After six years of major financial struggles, we're finally emerging from debt. I'm three months away from paying off my $42,000 in credit card debt. But as quickly as I pay off mine, she continues piling up her own. She has about 10 credit cards with around $10,000 on them.

I hate to see us buried in debt again.

What can I do without rocking a beautiful marriage? And before your readers suggest I suck it up to allow her the luxuries, that's not possible. I drive a 10-year-old bashed-in pickup truck with 150,000 miles on it. I need dentures and new glasses. And I'm no slacker. I've been with the same company for 36 years.

If she were a drinker, smoker or gambler, that would be one thing. But she's a wonderful woman whose only vice is shopping.

—Buried in Debt

Dear Buried: First, congratulations on your own debt diet. You see how good it feels to finally emerge from debt.

It doesn't matter that your wife makes more money—a higher income doesn't justify her overspending. I read recently that many companies are cutting back on overtime because of the soft economy—your wife's extra income could disappear overnight.

You two need to commit to debt counseling. A counselor could help your wife see the long-term impact of today's choices.

I really like the work Suze Orman has done to educate and encourage people to control their spending practices. Her latest book is "Women & Money: Owning the Power To Control Your Destiny (2007, Spiegel & Grau).

Isn't "Buried in Debt's" last paragraph a scream plea for Amy to give weight to what's really going on here (notwithstanding his first sentence)? And instead of doing that, she completely whiffs. Well, okay, maybe not completely, but she never makes solid contact with the ball, either.

The dude wants to hear that compulsive shopping is as much a problem and an addiction as alcoholism, drug addiction, compulsive gambling, nicotine addiction, etc. And instead of acknolwedging that, Amy talks about debt counseling services.

Oy.


Thank you, Bucky. I knew you'd see things my way.

Sexy bitch.

From today's "Dear Abby":

DEAR ABBY: My mother-in-law -- I'll call her "Irene" -- refers to our 3-year-old daughter, "Amber," as "sexy." When she buys clothing for Amber, she will say, "This is sexy." When Amber was younger and would pull up her dress in play, Irene would say, "Are you trying to be sexy?" Luckily, when it has happened, Amber either didn't hear or remember her comments.
I'm afraid if we don't put a stop to it, Irene will continue saying these things. Maybe she thinks it's cute, but I would like to keep my little girl innocent as long as I can. My husband agrees with me, but he's afraid of offending his mother. Why would a grandmother call her young granddaughter "sexy"? Please advise. -- AMBER'S MOMMY IN CLEVELAND

DEAR MOMMY: Your mother-in-law may have a limited vocabulary, or she may be projecting her adult feelings onto Amber -- not realizing that children her granddaughter's age do not experience sexual feelings the way adults do.

Whatever Irene's reasoning, I agree that her comments are inappropriate, and she should be told to cut them out. With marketing, advertising and media the way they are today, your little girl will be bombarded with promotional messages in which sex is a sales tool before she hits kindergarten. She doesn't need to be sexually objectified by her grandmother, too.

As far as I'm concerned, Chris Rock had it right: The father's primary job is to keep his daughter off the goddamn pole. "Amber's" daddy is on the road to failure and grandma's giving him directions. Ew. Unclean. Unclean.

Incidentally, that pic on the right? Cutest damn pole dancer I've ever seen.

My husband's a perv! HE LOOKS AT PORN!

From today's "Tales from the Front":

Dear Cheryl: I caught my husband watching Internet porn. Before this happened, I had lost interest in sex for a while. I didn't tell him I knew what he was doing. What I did was to really step up the sex with him to let him know I was interested again. A few days after we had good sex, I caught him again.

This time I confronted him. He said he would stop and we worked things out. But I'm still the one who's initiating sex. What should I do? Should I continue to seduce him or let him come to me when he wants it?

—Back in the Mood

Dear Back in the Mood: Your husband might think that your renewed interest in sex is only temporary. Or he may be hooked on Internet porn. How do you feel about porn? Would you be willing to watch it with him? That's one option.

In the meantime, continue to seduce him. See if he gets the hint that your interest in sex isn't a passing thing. Stay in touch and let's see what's going on.

Look, neither of you understand the relationship men have with porn. The sexual urges of men aren't like that bucket you keep under a leak in the roof that will spill over if you don't empty it out. I'll bet "Back in the Mood's" husband was surfing internet porn before she lost interest in sex, and chances are, he's going to do it again. A man's relationship with Bangbros and Vivid Video isn't going to be terribly affected by whether he's getting laid on a regular basis by his wife or not.

We like sex. We think about it all the time. If you have sex with us, great, but we're just going to think about again in an hour. And if you don't have sex with us, whatever. We're still thinking about it. This is true for your boyfriends, your husbands, your brothers, your fathers, and your failed Democratic candidates for presidents. We like boobies and cooters and we like 'em a lot.

That your man is surfing internet porn is not a rejection of you. Again: IT'S NOT ABOUT YOU. If you were a porn star who indulged your husband's every threesome-while-bound-with-a-ball-gag-and-smeared-with-Hershey's-chocolate-syrup fantasy, your husband would still check out some porn on occasion. That's just the way we are. If you're blonde, he's checking out redheads. If you're white, he's checking out blacks. If you're short, he's checking out WNBA players. Whatever. That's just the way we're wired.

And another thing: Just because a guy checks out porn on occasion doesn't mean he's a goddamn porn addict, okay? Does it interfere in his daily life and his real-life relationships? If so, then you've got a problem. If he's just checking out some silicone boobs and bleached hair once in a while with his best friends from the Johnson & Johnson Company, really, what's the big deal? Just because you don't understand it doesn't mean it's an addiction.

People can have a drink or two on a regular basis without being alcoholics. And I can check out my midget dominatrix porn without being dragged in to Sex Addicts Anonymous, thankyouverymuch.

The luckiest people in the world.

From today's "Tales from the Front":

Dear Cheryl: I have two major problems tied together: 1) I really want to find a romantic partner, and 2) I hate myself for feeling that I need one. I've been told my whole life that I need to be independent and able to take care of myself. I am. I'm a 23-year-old graduate student at a prestigious world university in a challenging male-dominated technical field. I love the professional opportunities and challenges available.

However, I feel terribly guilt-ridden and weak because I'm not happy with my personal life. I feel that I'm failing as a professional woman because I'm not satisfied with a life that consists of just my friends and me.

I've been told over and over to be patient, to concentrate on being an interesting, attractive person and that the rest would take care of itself. But it isn't. I feel this horrible sense of failure because I'm lonely—not for want of friends or family—but for want of a real relationship.

I hate myself for wanting a partner, not necessarily a husband, yet—but a partner. I hate myself because I want a man I can depend on when I know logically that I should depend only on myself. I know I can work, live and even thrive professionally by myself, but I don't want to anymore. The only thing I hate more than being alone is the guilt I feel over hating being alone.

I don't know what to do. I've tried joining clubs, starting new hobbies, taking up dancing, online dating, fix-ups by friends, clubs, bars. I'm not unattractive and don't have a terrible personality. I just can't find anyone I fit with and I'm not happy with the "be patient" approach. I've seen too many women end up permanently alone.

—I Am Woman Hear Me Roar

Dear I Am Woman Hear Me Roar: You've come a long way, baby. A long way since Gloria Steinem said, "A woman without a man is like a fish without a bicycle." Turns out, fish might not need bicycles, but women do need men. A least most of them do if they want to have healthy, happy lives with children and families. So, get over your guilt over wanting a partner. That is so mid-20th Century.

Right on. People need people, as a woman with a giant honker once said. Humans need romance and romantic relationships. That's not a sign of weakness. Being a feminist doesn't mean you don't need anyone, let alone a man. It just means you're no worse (or better) than a man. And men need companionship, too. There's nothing wrong with admitting that to yourself.

He's a loser, but he's the only loser my daughter's got

From today's "Ask Ellie":

My daughter, 21, and her daughter, 2, lived for six months with the child’s father; he’s verbally abusive and puts her down or blames her whatever’s wrong in his life. He doesn’t work, and they’re currently living off assistance.

My daughter was scared to go out to work, as he sleeps all day and may not look after his child.

Recently she called us during a fight, to help her leave him. She later confided that she’d learned he was on drugs again. She and our granddaughter have been staying with us for several weeks; she periodically takes the girl to see him, and stays overnight.

I can tell that she’d like to go back with him. We tell her it only matters that she makes her decisions based on what she knows is best for her and her daughter.

If she does return to him, what should we do to help protect our granddaughter, without causing our daughter more upset and potentially harming our relationship with her and the child?

Does the law require us to do or reveal anything?

- Worried Parents

If you witness or know of any incidents of child abuse and/or neglect, you do have a legal responsibility to report it to child protection authorities. This is too serious a danger for the child, to worry about upsetting your daughter.

However, if no such incident occurs and your daughter chooses to return to this man, you can best “help” the situation by staying close to her and her daughter, so that she knows she has refuge with you if she needs it.

Instead of focusing on your worries, try to get her to do the thinking about how things have been and what she can expect from a life with this man. Ask questions without casting blame… let her reflect on her answers, even if only in her own mind.

Don’t pressure her; let her own sense of responsibility take hold.

The second to last paragraph in Ellie's response really should have taken center stage in her response. The first thing "Worried Parents" should be doing is talking to their daughter and try to get her to see that hey, maybe a drug-addicted, abusive, layabout isn't the best parental figure to have around a young child. I've said it before and I'll say it again: What, exactly, are we clinging to here?

And "Worried Parents" really shouldn't be so much concerned with what the law requires them to do as much as they should be concerned with protecting their grandchild. What, do we have to look to the state legislature for parenting tips now? They know this situation no es bueno for their grandchild. That's enough. Forget what the law says. Do what's right.

Haute couture for the office

From today's "Ask Amy":

Dear Amy: I am wondering what you think about bras in the workplace. I have small breasts and am comfortable not wearing a bra. In fact, I am more comfortable not wearing a bra. I find them itchy and pokey and constraining. Just wearing my shirt or dress is so nice! I've stopped wearing a bra unless I'm wearing a formal, strapless dress and need a little "help."

However, my boss—whom I am very close to—has mentioned that I don't wear a bra, so I know it's noticeable.

I am hoping bras are like sweaters. Wear one if you need to; don't if you don't. Am I wrong?

— A

You ain't wrong, sister. And may I remind you and all of your broadchested friends: It's almost Memorial Day. And that means summer. And really, who wants to wear a sweater during the summer? Or a pinchy, constraining, wired undergarment, for that matter?

Free the mammaries, ladies. Why do you hate freedom?

She's a trend-setter.

Yeah, you're going to have a great marriage.

From today's "Ask Amy":

Dear Amy: I've always held my friends closer than any boyfriend, because after a breakup my friends are the ones who will be there for me.

Duh. You don't break up with your friends. Usually, you just drift apart. Saying that you hold friends closer than boyfriends because they'll be there for you after a breakup is just begging the question. Of course your boyfriend isn't going to be there for you after a breakup. THEY JUST BROKE UP WITH YOU.

But I've never had this problem before. I recently started seeing "Rob." He's great. He's met a few of my friends, and they love him—all except my closest guy friend.

"Steve" is gay, and when we went out one night with my girlfriends, Steve felt Rob made some rude comments. I was there, and so were my girlfriends, and no one felt Rob was rude. I think maybe Steve was a bit too sensitive to something Rob said in an attempt to be funny. He didn't make any anti-gay comments or anything like that. Ever since, Steve is adamant that he does not like Rob.

That was their only meeting, but my relationship with Rob is getting fairly serious, so I'd like for him to be able to go out with all my friends, including Steve.

I feel guilty because I take my friends' opinions to heart, but I just don't think Rob is a bad guy, and all of my other friends think he's great. Rob has even asked about Steve a few times, so it's not as if Rob hates him.

What should I do?

I don't want Steve to think I'm betraying him.

—Wondering

Dear Wondering: You are right to take your friends' views seriously, but remember that you are the one dating Rob, and your judgment is the most important.

What are we, in high school? Do all of your friends need to like your boy/girlfriend? If you like the guy/chickie, what difference does it make if one of your friends doesn't? (Assuming, of course, that your friend's dislike isn't rooted in legitimate and genuine concerns -- such as genuine douchebaggery -- that you're blind to because your boy/girlfriend is really frickin' hot.)

Do you like him/her? That's all that matters. If your friend doesn't, that's his problem and one that he's going to have to learn to get over if he wants to remain your friend.

And this whole "I don't want Steve to think I'm betraying him" business is a huge red flag. Steve isn't your husband or your priest, lady. He's a friend. He doesn't get a say in who you date. No one does. There's entirely too much emphasis being placed on friendship here. I see a rocky marriage in someone's future.

Men make the rules.

From today's Hax:

Dear Carolyn:

I was unable to have children and my husband refused to consider adoption. Therapy has helped me come to terms with this, but I find myself struggling for a graceful way to cope when people talk at length about kids and grandkids. For example, I was at a breakfast event with a group of professional women, and fairly quickly they started telling each other about their children and grandchildren. This went on for 20 minutes. I felt terribly left out, and after a while I simply got up and left.

The letter goes on about this problem, which Carolyn addresses.

What she doesn't address, however, is the very first sentence. Having children is apparently VERY important to the woman who wrote this letter. So important, in fact, that she can't be around people who are sharing pleasantries about their own children and grandchildren for a prolonged period of time. She's willing to adopt, but her husband isn't? What the hell is going on there?

Adoption is one of the most generous acts a couple/person can bestow upon another. They're not only opening their homes to a child that doesn't have one, they're opening their hearts to this child and saying, "Come be with me and I promise to love you like my own." Is there anything that could be more giving? Seriously, I place this on par or above directed organ donorship. You're giving a piece of you to a child you don't know and have no biological connection to. How great is that?

And the letter writer's husband doesn't want to do that. Which I can understand. Adoption isn't for everyone. But it's something that is clearly very important to his wife. It's something that she undoubtedly wants. Why is her husband the one calling the shots here? Being childless isn't and shouldn't be the "default" setting for their relationship that they revert to when consensus cannot be reached. Just as both of them should agree to adopt, both should agree not to adopt. And I'm not sensing that this letter writer ever agreed to that.

Which really sucks. I can't believe that there isn't a large amount of pent up resentment toward her husband for this reason. Ick.