I received yet another e-mail from the Washington Post Date Lab editor yesterday. This time I was asked to sign a publicity/liability release. Because of the nature of my job, I spend a great deal of time reading, researching, and writing about liability concerns and waivers (trust me, it's a lot more fun than it sounds). Naturally, whenever I'm asked to sign a release of some kind, I'm sure to read it over carefully--more out of a sense of curiosity and habit, than any kind of responsibility.
The release the Post sent over was a pretty standard one. It struck me, as I worked my way through the various clauses, that anytime we decide to go on a date, we are essentially assuming a series of risks. There may not be an affidavit to sign or a lawyer present (although in my case, there usually is), but any seasoned dater knows the risks, losses, expenses, and potential harm--both physical and emotional--that may come from the experience. Dating, for all intents and purposes, is risky behavior. Whether it's an acceptable, reasonable risk is for each of us to determine, but what greater risk is there than taking one's self--essentially one's most valuable asset--and placing it on the line to silently ask two of the most important questions we'll ever ask: Am I who you want? Are you who I want?
My initial anxiety about this date has eased considerably in the past day or so. I suspect that it's because as of late I've become a bit of a forensic naval-gazer. I've taken to breaking down and analyzing all my actions with the same fervor that I once reserved for the literary works of James Joyce. I'm obsessed with finding connections, patterns, motifs, and underlying themes. I've noticed that up until now, my approach to dating centered on that first question (am I who you want), but neglected the second (are you who I want). Before going out I'd primp, worry, and wonder if I was pretty enough, thin enough, clever enough--but then I'd get to the restaurant, bar, theater, wherever, and find that it didn't matter if I was all of the above because it turned out that he wasn't who I wanted.
The thing is, that for all my confusion about where I want to live and work, the one thing that I am sure of is the kind of man that I want a relationship with. It isn't as if I approach dates with a strict rubric of attributes, skills, and interests that I need met--it's more of a feeling, the recognition of a combination of qualities, which I've learned--through trial and error--are important to me. And while I feel lucky that I know this already, I also understand that it takes dating to a different level. It seems as if I can no longer just date for the sake of dating. I'm officially looking for something--for someone. I'm not naive enough to expect fireworks and love at first sight, but I do know what I don't want and what I'm no longer willing to waste my time on.
And is this knowledge a liability when it comes to dating? Absolutely. Whereas a couple years ago I had no trouble seeing several guys at the same time and dating all over the map, now the thrill in that is gone. I've become blase about the whole thing. I'll go on one or two dates and then pull a disappearing act. It's not as if the guys I've been seeing lately aren't great, because they all are in their own way--they're just not for me. At least not right now... And that can lead to loneliness, because the only thing more difficult than not knowing what you want, is knowing what you want, but not being able to find it--or finding it and not being able to have it.
But I'm confident that I will meet this person someday, and until then all that I can do is try to be as honest as I can be with myself and with my date companions (as the Post calls them). And I will go on this date and I will assume all risks associated with it (even that of "potential public ridicule") and I will faithfully report back to you all. I must admit that I am incredibly curious to see who they picked out for me based on my completely ridiculous answers to those completely ridiculous questions.
For those of you just tuning in...
And a link to the latest Date Lab article...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
12 comments:
oh yeah this date is going to be fun to hear about, they probably picked a lawyer..
As long as they didn't pick the infomercial guy with the question marked covered suit, you're golden.
Can't wait to hear about it. I have a feeling it will go well. And, if not, you'll have prime blogging material.
Ha! Matthew Lesko...oh Lord that would be awful. I see him everywhere and I love how upset he gets when you stare at him. It's kind of like, "Sir, if you don't want people looking...don't dress like the Riddler!" If you don't know what we're talking about...
I've been following this series in the Post, and it seems they don't deliberately set you up for the amusement/drama of it, as in that cheesy television show, Blind Date. But it's hard to say what their criteria are in making the matches. I think in this last one, it was definitely that he liked pixiesh women, because that fits her features, but she didn't want a shorter man, which he is. Seems to have worked, though. They're engaged.
None of my friends have ever had luck via Craig's List or Match.com, which is not to say they don't work. I've known several people who completely the lengthy questionnaire attached to eHarmony only to be told they matched NO ONE! That's right, you freaks of nature, you are compatible with NO ONE. Joking. Anyway, I know of one that did work. A woman I went to school with was left widowed at a ridiculously young age. As we watched her husband's casket being removed out of the back of the hearse, to be led into the church, one of our mutual school friends louded asided, "She won't be alone long." As shockingly timed as that comment was--she wasn't. A man ran an ad in the back of Washingtonian magazine that he was looking for a "Jersey Girl," i.e. one from New Jersey. She was. They met. They danced in a parking lot to the car radio, they married shortly after and, to my knowledge, they remain happily married. So. Ya takes ya chances. Right?
Among the most mature (and eloquent) statements I've heard leave your lips (or fingers, as the case may be) on the topic in some time, maybe ever. I too am very interested in hearing about this date, but in the mean time, I'm so glad you put all that out there.
Much Love.
Oh sweetheart I'm so excited you're doing this! :)
lol. oh I completely just got Vanessa's comment.
Ok, I just read the article about the couple that got ENGAGED after a month, and are getting married in OCTOBER? Whoa!
Alejandra, maybe you should get the Post to pick up the wedding expenses, a la Trista Rehn and Ryan Sutter. Or, if you prefer, Star Jones and Al Reynolds.
Cube: I agree that they've been pretty responsible about the matching so far. I think there was only one date so far that went horribly. I'm sure at the very least it'll be interesting.
Looney: Thanks...you know I have my moments sometimes...
Fi: I'm excited too...nervous, but excited. As for Vanessa's comment I'm not sure that I get it, but I'll be sure to ask her when she gets here in 30 mins...
Armo: I know...crazy, huh? Well I'm pretty sure that's a lightning only strikes once kinda deal. I'm..uh...not really looking to get married this year. As for Trista and Star...I'm really not sure which is worse...
Hey, at least Trista got Ryan, whereas Star got a gay guy.
And a request inspired after voraciously reading all the Date Lab articles just now -- please don't tell the Post about how "great the sex is" if you really hit it off. Thanks.
Do you think if we kissed, we would switch souls and lives like in "Prelude to a kiss", that crappy Meg Ryan movie?
And then we'd both spend a couple of days basking in the assumed richness of the other's glory - it would only take those few days, however, for both of us to realize how rich our own lives were. I would come to terms with the fact that I don't really like popsicles and I hate going on dates. Perhaps even my dreams of having curly hair would dissipate after only having to straighten it once.
You would get sick of wearing gaucho's and would get sick of living with my parents, and get sick of having 3 dogs that (for all intents and purposes suck), and while you would probably love the chocolate milk that I drink everyday, you'd get sick of that. You'd also get sick of the fact that I walk the length of a city block to get to my mailbox and that someone has to mow all this grass...
This is probably just a bad idea all around.
Blind Date actually shows you the dates though, so they have an interest in making the dates as sensationalistic as possible (which I suspect often means conflict and thus is why virtually all their dates fail). The Post, on the other hand, only can write it up before and after. And as something of a credible news organization that only does entertainment on the side, they have some reputation on the line to make these things work (I imagine they also have a huge pool of people to work with). I'm extremely curious as to the matchmaking genuises pairing people up--what are their criteria? What's their expertise? And where have they been the past 10+ years? Can I hire them independently? I was really excited to see this because EVERYTHING I've tried in dating has failed (see my own blog...) and I have a lot of respect for the Post. Unfortunately they said being out of town is an automatic disqualifier. I told them I'd fly back to DC if they set me up!
Post a Comment