“Why hello number? Were you just pulled out of kerzain’s butt? You were? That is somehow…not surprising.”

Living stereotypes.

If it’s what I think it is, its called a Halo brace and it looks really nasty. I had a hospital roommate once who had one, and it was hard not to look at the pins going directly into his skull and oozing puss.

That would be it, yeah. The four spots where the pins were inserted match the illustration.

I don’t think his ever oozed cats, though.

And Jack Johnson is probably more of a metrosexual thing, in retrospect.

I chatted with him tonight (the date, not Jack Johnson) and he e-mailed a Powerpoint presentation one of the radio guys had done that shows off the Langley farm setup (referred to as The Portable Man Cave Project) . It’s actually a lot nicer than I’d have guessed. There are two sea containers joined together side-by-side and both are finished, furnished and bristling with enough radio gear and gadgetry to send someone who enjoys all that into a sustained nerdgasm. The presentation appropriately ends on an ominous “you may have already seen too much” note.

“Hey, you wanna come over and look at my power point presentations?”

Score another one for Canadian health care. I’m not sure how he ever slept with those intermittent leaking cats.

Date #2 with radio guy was a fairly simple outing – a little BBQ dinner at his place. I arrive and he is getting things ready. I wave to the seven year old boy on the couch watching The Incredible Hulk on the TV.

Wait.

I don’t remember the seven year old.

It turns out radio guy is a Big Brother (not the Orwellian kind, the one that takes out a kid for fun stuff because his parents are somehow unable to do so) and every other weekend he takes in this seven year old boy. The kid was apparently an ‘accident’ of two young parents and one day the mother took him to daycare and never returned. His father lives over on Vancouver Island and sees him rarely (and is the one who dubbed him an accident), so he was raised for a few years by his grandmother. Apparently mom re-entered the picture and Grandma signed papers allowing her to take the kid back (which kind of boggles my mind. I’d think abandoning your kid once would be sufficient to be declared an unfit parent forever but maybe everyone deserves a second chance or something).

It sounds like his home life is not great but the kid seems very level-headed. He beat me at some French card game called Mille Bornes. He also burped and farted while playing, apologizing for both incidents. I assume this happened because kids are filled with gas. I’m not an expert on children but it seems a logical guess.

As you might expect, having a little kid sitting between you and your date pretty much guarantees a Little House on the Prairie evening. “Hey, Pa, can we play with string again?” “Now, son, you know how playing with string can lead to dark thoughts. Why don’t you go till the field instead? It’ll be fun, like a game!”

We’re planning on meeting for dinner again, probably on Monday (sans kid). I’m still not convinced on the whole allure of opposites but admit to being intrigued enough to see where it might lead, at least.

Hell yea, you’ve nabbed yourself a gamer.

Wait, did he not warn you that his Little Brother would be there during your dinner date? If not…was this beyond his control because of some last minute change of plans involving his Little Brother? If not…was this supposed to be a surprise? Some kind of test?

I just don’t get him not giving you a heads up. Not cool. Although I have to say he gets major points from me for being a Big Brother.

Respect to you too, Ned, for rolling with it. Good on you.

Also, your “Little House on the Prairie evening” bit reminds me of Stephen Colbert’s recent interview with Bill Bryson.

-xtien

“So it wasn’t as boring as I thought…there was your entertainment.”

Mille Bornes fucking rules.

Sorry, I phrased things a bit confusingly. I was trying to express my reaction to actually seeing the seven year old at radio guy’s place since I’d only heard about him. It was like, “Oh yeah, there’s the kid. This is different.” Radio guy already filled me in on the Big Brother thing and warned me the kid would probably be there since this was the weekend he had him. He also made it very clear that he was okay with me opting out of the dinner if it was a problem.

Also, The Incredible Hulk didn’t look very good. The seven year old was happy enough to switch to Mille Bornes. So was I. I didn’t feel bad when I won a game, too, because that seven year old had some serious winner attitude going after he claimed victory on the first round. Radio guy kept telling him it’s about having fun, not winning. He’ll probably get it after a few more crushing defeats!

Yeah, the intrigue is definitely enough for now. For me and my now fiancee, I kept trying to second guess the relationship on a conscious level based on our differences but kept sticking it out because at the end of the day, I had a great time when I was with her and the relationship made me happy. In the end, that turned out to be the important thing. (Well, that and sharing core values that trumped superficial differences.)

My wife and I are almost a case of opposites attracting (and, as related many, many pages ago, we met on match.com).

At our core, we share a lot of values. However, with day-to-day stuff we’re extremely different. She’s a social worker, working with dying patients and I’m a video game programmer. I come home stressed about deadlines and she’s just had a patient die of cancer. Her talents my own have almost no overlap. Yet, I think these differences are really an important part of how we “work” as a couple.

And I definitely met my wife in an attempt to meet someone different after consciously seeking out different sorts of gals to date on Match. Previously I’d gone through a string of many, very similar women. The two main things tying them together was that they tended to be smart in a somewhat techy field (nerdy but not geeky) and a little bit challenged when it came to relaxing and enjoying life. I was attracted to their accomplishments in a field that I was in and found that I was good at making that type of gal happier by getting them to not worry about things as much.

However none of those relationships worked out (although a few lasted a few years). Ultimately I found that sharing talents was a bit stressful: every time you achieve something, the other person appreciates what it is BUT it’s hard not to feel a bit of competition going both ways or to find their work/life more stressful since it shares so many problems with your own. And, moreover, I found that I was dating these very accomplished women who were, nonetheless, really anxious and had a really hard time just having fun – which made all of my relationships ultimately rather stressful and times bordering on codependency.

I don’t think I realized that, quite, at the time but I did know that I wanted something different. It worked out great. Having such different talents means that we complement each other very well. I have a great respect for what she does although it’s something I could ever do very well and vice versa. Sharing our work drama and such is a lot easier when it’s so different. And, while she’s still prone to a bit of perfectionism, she’s a lot better at just being happy than many of the girls I was with before – which in turn gives me a lot more time and energy to just enjoy life.

Still, there are many ways in which we’re very similar. We’re both from Oregon, we’re both atheists (although she came to that later in life), very liberal, both former athletes, we both love food, wine and travel, etc.

So I guess think that it can be really great to turn your “type” upside down and see what shakes out although ultimately I think you’ve still got to have some strong shared values or things may be too hard.

St Gabe, that was very insightful. Good point, and good read.

Hopefully this won’t bring in the rant aspect of the recently locked thread, but I wanted to talk a bit more about this “If you like being with someone what does it matter what they look like” concept.

A friend of mine just started doing online dating, and we’ve been talking a bunch about it. Every time some guy sends her a nice email but she doesn’t find him attractive, she feels guilty for being “shallow”. And I’ll admit, I’ve had a similar reaction myself a couple times - girls that I thought were great people, fun to have as friends, but just didn’t really find attractive enough to want a relationship, and that made me feel like I was being shallow. But is it really being shallow? There’s a difference between a friend and a potentially romantic partner, and that difference is pretty much attraction, right?

Attraction is a subjective matter, with (for most people) multiple contributing factors. Personality, appearance, social standing, all coupled with mitigating factors like situational advantage (if you’ve just been dumped, someone who might not normally seem attractive can become so if they show interest, for instance).

The general conception of “shallow” is when appearance becomes the ONLY contributing factor, or one weighted so heavily that it can outweigh negatives in all the others. Frankly, it’s just as shallow to find someone attractive based solely on personality as it is to find them attractive solely on appearance.

There’s also a major difference between “find attractive” and “are attracted to”.

I’ll echo the very different thing with my wife. We are both very similar in some ways (our love of books, movies and each other) and VERY different in other ways. I’ve been married to her for almost 17 years and I still can’t fathom how she works sometimes. Which makes it a mess of fun.

What we both of have going for us though is that while we’re both stubborn, we both appreciate each other enough to also be adaptable. She’s learned a lot about and even plays video games now, while I know way too much about cooking and I spent long hours helping her write her book (what do I know from writing!).

To be a long term relationship it takes both a willingness to adapt and a stubborness to not adapt. And the wisdom/luck to know which time is which.

Yeah, I hope my joking in the thread didn’t lead to it getting locked. I mean it was a weird rant but whatever.

I think attraction is obviously a major part of relationships, because you want to have sex with someone you are attracted to, or at least “show them off”. That’s not a shallow, bad thing, it’s like “I’m proud of my partner”.

Anyway, when it comes to actual attraction, that is wildly varied. It’s stereotyped by the Jessica Albas and Brad Pitts, but the world is so diverse that there are so many eyes of the beholder that image is a joke. Some people weigh personality more, some boob size, some like nice shoes, some like height, some flexibility. I mean, you can go on and on. For some people, having something really in common with someone is very attractive. Eye of the beholder, bascially.

So yeah, attraction is extremely important in dating.

“Attraction” and objective “physical attractiveness” are two different things. I think ravenight was talking about physical attractiveness.

Thank whomever that there are people in this world for whom attraction is not limited to physical attractiveness, or I would have been very lonely over the last many years.

You and me both, Jerri. I give thanks that I dated (and, in one case, married) women who were infinitely less shallow than I am.