On Finding Out You Went on a Date with an Insane Person

So, communication has been closed off between me and the Catholic. His reason? "The physical distance between us was too great." What? Huh? He lives 15 minutes away from me. I had planned to close him off as well, so I'm not particularly concerned at the outcome of the situation, but the reason is just... bizarre. Why not go with, "I'm just not ready to take the next step," or "My life is too busy right now"? Wouldn't those have made more sense? I mean, I understand that Dr. Warren doesn't leave an option of, "I'm freaked out and I am too much of a coward to ever see my date again," but really, why pick something so clearly bizarre and random? Or maybe by "physical distance" he means something weird and metaphysical? At any rate, so ends the tale of Dr. Crazy and the Crazy Catholic.

You may wonder what else is going on in eHarmony-land, for the suitors there do abound. Here's an update:

The Businessman - I don't know whether I like him or not because we've barely corresponded - he's pretty much jumped straight to "let's meet for a real conversation." I'm actually ok with this, after the debacle with the Insane Person above. Anyway, I responded positively, so we'll see if/when this happens.

The Consultant - I think I kind of hate him, and I probably should dump him, but I'm kind of fragile after the weird being dumped so I will not do that today. And maybe I should give him about 45 seconds more of a chance?

The Computer Engineer - I kind of like him, except I think he might not be a very good writer. He answered his essay questions very, very quickly (like not even with a complete sentence, let alone multiple sentences) and now I await an actual email from the dude. He's cute though. Edited to add: Yep, he's not a very good writer. You know that's the case when they begin their first "open message" back to you noting how obvious it is that I am an English professor. Nevertheless, he did answer my question about astrological sign, so I think he has a good sense of fun and whimsy. I will remain open-minded for the time being, I think, but to all of y'all who are thinking about dating English professors, PLEASE don't reveal that you're insecure because of our language skills. It's such a turn-off. If I hear one more time that somebody will have to watch their grammar around me, I might scream.

The Greek - Is clearly going on lots of dates with others because he's yet to answer my essay questions.

The Accountant - I think is also going on dates because we're stalled at "must haves/can't stands"

The Hot Teacher - I'm sure is going on lots of dates, because he's really hot.

The IT Consultant - Who I think might be a real asshole because he makes a point of saying that he doesn't want any women who "are into playing games." Those guys always seem to be real assholes, imho. But hey - it never hurt to answer some multiple choice questions.

I really can't believe that this is my life. It is so lame.

Jo(e)'s Pseudonymity Meme

Is your blogging persona more serious than your real life persona?

I don't think that it is, though I suppose it's possible that the tone is... I don't know, more strident on certain posts than I might be in real life.

Do you think the only safe way an academic can write publicly is to write anonymously?

Hmmm. This is an interesting question. I think it depends a lot on one's level in the academic hierarchy, one's discipline, and the topics about which a person chooses to write. Were my blog entirely about my field of specialty, for example, I think it would probably be quite safe to use my "real" name. However, were I using the blog in that way, I think that I would tend to edit myself a lot more than I currently do and I would see the blog as a professional document and treat it as such so as not to embarass myself in front of colleagues by presenting half-formulated ideas about things related to my field. However, if one is going to write about things in a provisional way - in a writing-as-thinking sort of way - I think that the pseudonym is useful as a screen between my professional self and my actual self - you know? I also do think that it's much less safe for the untenured, those still in graduate school, and those who choose to write about things that might be seen as controversial.

Do you think that your blog could ruin your career?

No. But maybe I'm stupid, and it really could. I guess I don't think that it will, but it's a risk I'm willing to take.

What would happen if an administrator at my college discovered my blog?

I can't imagine that any would take the time to read blogs, in truth, but even if they did come across my blog, the reality is that I write very, very little that is about my university specifically.

Do you use a pseudonym out of fear?

Fear, no. Caution, yes. Also, I think that when I took on the pseudonym I was playing with the idea of an overtly constructed academic identity. I wanted to fool around with making an identity that challenged some of the ways that women (and women professors) are described and that dealt with negotiating the personal and the professional. I don't think I'd feel comfortable doing that under my "work" name. Also, I think I liked the idea of the name as emblematic in some way - the first blogs I read were barely tenured and invisible adjunct, and they both used pseudonyms and it seemed both freeing and to make visible identities that are often invisible in academe - somebody trying to get pregnant with in vitro, somebody on the margins because of being a contingent worker, etc. If the writer uses a pseudonym, it's a lot less easy to dismiss the writer as not being relevant to one's own position on the academic food chain. I think that the pseudonym in fact lends authority to those who are marginalized in public academic discourse. If you saw my nametag at MLA, you would immediately move on to talk to somebody more important. If, however, my nametag said "Dr. Crazy," I suspect people would be a lot more interested.

What is the biggest drawback to writing pseudonymously?

Hmmm. I think the biggest drawback is probably that sometimes I feel like I wish I could write about what I do under my own name without it "meaning" something in terms of how I'm seen as a professional. Because I can't, I can't really capitalize on what I do with the blog in terms of my work. That said, the blog does work as a good "free space" for me to work out ideas, and it's been (I think) ultimately good for me professionally.

Has anyone stumbled on your blog and found it accidentally?

Not that I'm aware of.

Have you outed yourself to any other bloggers?

Yep. And now that I'm in my new space, I am very open about things related to my teaching and such, so it would be very easy for anybody who was interested to figure out who I am, even aside from just asking me.

Has your blog allowed you to experiment with writing?

It's definitely allowed me to experiment with tone and voice. I would also say that it's helped me to think through how I organize my thoughts in writing and in how I articulate arguments in writing. Finally, I think that it has helped me to think of "audience" in a way that is much more real and much less abstract. (In my academic writing, I often think of my audience as just a bunch of students who are forced to write papers, and I don't think that's a good thing.)

Why do you use a pseudonym?

Well, it allows me to feel much freer about not revising or not laboring over tiny details in my writing. Also, I like the image that my pseudonym conveys. "Dr. Crazy" is parts of me, but at the same time it's an identity that does to some extent stand on its own now. I suspect that if I met some of my readers, they'd have a hard time thinking of me as anything other than "Dr. Crazy," even if I told them to call me by my "real" name. That's interesting to me, and it's fun.

In An Unusual Turn of Events

One of my former students just came by, and I'm the one with tears in my eyes and not the other way around. Tears of being touched and happy, though, not the tears of anxiety that students usually have.

It was a student of mine from last semester, and she stopped by because she wanted me to know that she learned more in my class than in any other class at this university. She actually thanked me for the class. If I remember correctly, she's a senior.

Chemistry, Compatibility, Stupidity

I know that you all are dying to hear about the Date with the Catholic. Suffice it to say that the date itself was really fun (in my estimation) and that a good time was had (I think) by all. We met for a drink at a cheesy establishment (in case I hated him, I didn't want to meet someplace better) and then moved on to a less cheesy one. We basically hung out and talked for like 5 hours. No awkwardness - at all. I haven't heard from him since we parted ways, and so I'm not sure what more to say than that. Between the two of us I think we broke many of the rules of online dating and maybe even some of the Roman Catholic Church.

New goal for self: Learn to end a date properly.

Incidentally, I may have the opportunity to work on that goal very soon, as the Businessman has asked to meet.

Pseudonymity, Blogging as a Genre, Etc.

Tragically, my first attempt at this post was lost. Suffice it to say, that I want to move the discussion of the IHE article and pseudonymity and the genre of blogging up into a new thread. In this new thread, here are some things I'd like to see:

1) Would commenters please engage with each others' ideas? I'm not interested in reading well thought out comments that are punctuated with, "But see, that's why you're a petty jerk." Those don't do anything to up the ante on the discourse. Move on from being ticked off (i have), and let's have the conversation. Oh, and if anybody implies that a comment doesn't have value because the person who writes it has a pseudonym, or uses the fact that a person has a pseudonym as evidence for a claim, I'm going to assume that you want that comment deleted. In this space, whatever your feelings elsewhere, you've got to demonstrate respect for people with pseudonyms. Why? Well, because I use one, of course. And this is my playground and I'll run it as I see fit.

2) I think it's worthwhile to include the backlog of discussion (or paraphrased versions of it) that has occurred about the practice of using pseudonyms in this discussion, from way back in the day (think July 2004) to the present. That said, I'll direct you to a post from my old blog that I think articulates a lot of issues that continue to be at stake in the current debate.

3) Perhaps part of this discussion should also include a consideration of whether and how "popular" media like IHE influence how we're characterizing this genre (blogging) and the sub-genre (academic blogging). I'm coming to the conclusion that the main problem here is IHE and not actual bloggers.

4) I'm interested in thinking about the politics of referring to a blogger as anonymous vs. referring to a blogger as pseudonymous.

5) If you have posted on your blog about this topic and/or if you've seen a post that you think I'd be interested in, please do link to it. I lost the first version of this post in which I did link to some relevant posts at other blogs, but having lost it I just don't have it in me to go back and do it right now. (And I've got to go buy something to wear tonight that is neither inappropriately slutty nor something that I would teach in. It's a tough balance to strike, that one.)

All right, well, that's all folks! Let the games begin!

Poetry Friday - e.e. cummings - again

I know, I know. What's with me and the e.e. cummings? Somehow, this poem speaks to the feelings that I have about boys right before a date. I'm not sure what that says about me. And by the way, people? I would kill for a cigarette. (No, I'm not going to smoke one, but boy wouldn't I love to.)

[the boys i mean are not refined]

the boys i mean are not refined
they go with girls who buck and bite
they do not give a fuck for luck
they hump them thirteen times a night

one hangs a hat upon her tit
one carves a cross on her behind
they do not give a shit for wit
the boys i mean are not refined

they come with girls who bite and buck
who cannot read and cannot write
who laugh like they would fall apart
and masturbate with dynamite

the boys i mean are not refined
they cannot chat of that and this
they do not give a fart for art
they kill like you would take a piss

they speak whatever's on their mind
they do whatever's in their pants
the boys i mean are not refined
they shake the mountains when they dance

Did You Ever Wonder How Women End Up Falling In Love With Death Row Inmates?

I know I have. And now I have the answer. Now, I'm not saying I've fallen in love with anybody, because I'm not totally stupid. What I am saying, though, is that it's really easy to fall in like with somebody when you only know what they write to you. Writing is fucking powerful stuff. (When handled properly, of course.) Ok, must go read some Roland Barthes now to remember that the reader is the one who controls the text and that, since that is the case, that I am an idiot.

Dating in the New Millenium

I've been thinking a lot, especially over the past 24 hours or so, about this concept of "dating." It's kind of old-fashioned, isn't it? I've talked with my closest friends about this notion of "dating," and the refrain of these conversations was, "we don't like dating," or "oh god, I don't know if you can call what I have done or do dating." At first, I was inclined to think that the reasons that I and my friends have such a hard time with this concept was because we're easy. Not easy easy, but easy in an easy-like-sunday-morning-happy-feminist-I'm-not-going-to-buy-into-some-sort-of-idea-that-I'm-chattle-and-thus-should-increase-my-market-value-by-saying-no-to-sex way. Easy in an I-don't-believe-in-books-like- The Rules - way.

But as I've thought about it more, it occurs to me that maybe the reason that we're all so uncomfortable with the idea of dating - and why I'm experiencing the radical insecurity that I'm experiencing right now - is because "dating" hadn't really been a part of my interactions with the opposite sex prior to this foray into the world of online dating. As I mentioned in passing before, my experience with "dating" was really more one of "hanging out" - you're in a couple with a person, you're "seeing each other," but this is pretty much limited to hanging out together at home (or in a dorm room) or meeting each other out at bars or maybe getting a meal together, but in a very casual sort of a way - or "hooking up" - which, of course, is a relationship based primarily, if not entirely, on sex in the middle of the night after both parties have gone out with their friends earlier in the evening. Now, within both of these categories there are smaller sub-divisions, like being "friends with benefits," or like living together. But really, all of these are on a continuum of casual social interaction that doesn't have the same rituals that "dating" in the formal sense has.

What does this mean? Well, for example, let's consider the forms of entertainment when you're "hanging out" with somebody. There's renting a movie. There's ordering some food. Maybe you meet some mutual friends out at a bar. Or, of course, there's also the ever-popular watching boys playing video games. (How many hours of my life I've wasted doing that, I do not know.) You might go on one, or maybe two, things that resemble "dates," but that is only after you have already made out or hooked up.

See, now with actual dating it's different. "Entertainment" means things like going out to dinner or to a movie or things. Also, you tend to dress up for the other person, and you don't tend to know the other person very well, if at all. You're trying to impress the other person in some way at the exact same time that you are trying to get to know the person. There is a frisson of anticipation surrounding the date, surrounding meeting the person, surrounding whether or when you might kiss or whatever.

With hanging out or hooking up there is no frisson - there is no if only when. If you kissed the first time you "hung out," you might decide that after the retroactive first date is when you'll have sex. Or sex was actually the ice-breaker that made the two of you decide you might go on a date. With this dating business, it's a whole new ballgame. For one, the date didn't begin with sex, and nor can it really end with sex. You don't know each other well enough for that. You're not automatically in a couple, and you shouldn't stop trying to date other people, because unlike with the very, very, instantly monogamous "hanging out" it's expected that you will not be immediately exclusive. (With hanging out, exclusivity is assumed - if you're hanging out with two guys, that makes you a cheater and a slut; with hooking up, there is no exclusivity assumed, but there is also no real relationship beyond sex; with friends with benefits, there is a kind of odd emotional exclusivity, and it doesn't end well when one of the friends tries to have a "real" relationship with somebody other than the other friend.) And you don't know if you'll kiss the person, or even if you'll like the person. You might have one drink with the person and never see the person again. And there is a formal rhythm to this actual dating thing, a dance that each person plays in moving forward and then pulling back, and it's unclear from the outset where it will go.

With the emergence of online dating, actual dating is a normal thing. It wasn't for the first 10 years or so of my dating existence. My training-ground was the land of hooking up and hanging out. I wonder how to do this other thing. It will be interesting to see. And yes, I'm going out with the Catholic tomorrow night. Crap.

The Reports of My Death Have Been Greatly Exaggerated

No, folks, I've not stopped blogging. I have, however, been quoted out of context (without being identified, I might add) in an inside higher education article about academic blogging, and the author asserts that I have, in fact, decided to stop blogging because the strain of my pseudonym was too much to bear.

Note to author: try reading the people whom you choose to quote, reading them carefully even. Yes, I have stopped blogging in my old space. Yes, I now blog here. Under the same name. The name that I created for blogging. My alter-ego, if you will. And don't use me to support your argument that blogging, particularly pseudonymous blogging, is too serious, or at least not "serious" in terms of "postmodern play and experimentation" in a way that you deem appropriate for the genre. Dude, I AM experimenting. I AM playing. You just weren't invited to the game.

(Postscript: I'm not sure which irritates me more: being quoted out of context, being quoted without being identified, or being quoted in the service of an argument that I find less than convincing. I suppose it's a toss-up, really. And I'm not linking to the author's blog because I don't want to give him any more traffic. I don't think he deserves it.)

What This Whole Boy-Crazy Thing Is REALLY About (an Actual Academic Post)

This blog has devolved into a mere chronicling of my adventures in online dating, and I'm stopping that right now. Well, that's not to say I won't update you all on them, but I don't want that to be all that this blog is about. And it strikes me that by writing about all of that it's allowed me not to write about some things that are really driving this foray into the online singles scene.

I am in my third year of a tenure-track job. I am about halfway to going up for tenure. It's time for me to figure out what I'm doing with my life, and that's what's really going on here. It's what's going on with the eating better; it's what's going on with the quitting smoking; it's what's going on with the working out; it's what's going on with the foray into online dating. All of these seemingly "personal" things are really about the realization that if my professional life is going to be here than I'd sure as hell better have a personal life here, too. And if I can't have a personal life here, then I'd better figure that out pretty quickly so that I can blow this popsicle stand.

The truth of the matter is that I'm deeply ambivalent about both the prospect of leaving here and the prospect of staying. On the one hand, I'm "lucky." I'm in a tenure-track job. I like my colleagues. I basically like my university. I like my students. And I like that I'm not in a rural backwater someplace but rather in a metropolitan (well, small metropolitan) area, and that I'm near to my family (well, within easy driving distance of them). On the other, though, I suppose I do have reservations about signing on here for the long haul. As much as I think I've thrived under the 4/4 load, teaching but three courses this semester has really shown me how taxing this load is. As much as I like the area of the country in which I live, I really don't have much of a life outside of work. I've got a couple of close friends here, but that's really about it. And that's not ok with me. I want really to live where I live, you know?

So what's a girl to do? Do I fish or cut bait? I've had colleagues ask me whether I'm trying "to write my way out of here," and the truth is that I'm not. Yes, I've been productive research-wise, but not climbing-the-academic-institution-ladder productive. I'm productive for a place like this one. So, I could make a lateral move. Ok, but why? If I'm going to have the same kind of job, then why not just stay? The only reason I can think of to move is location. If I can't make a life for myself in this location, then I should try to find another location, right? So, that means I've got to try, and so that means that I've got to go online and try to find a boyfriend. And that sucks, you know? That's no way to run a life. But the truth of it is that I do want that in my life, so why should I feel badly about looking for it? Why is it wrong to want that?

And then I wonder whether the reason I'm thinking about pulling out of here is that I'm so indoctrinated by moving from place to place throughout my education that I just can't imagine being here beyond 4 or 5 years. It's like I've got senioritis or something. I keep thinking that maybe if I were more settled personally I wouldn't have that feeling about the job, which I actually really love.

So yes. This is what's really going on with Crazy. What's really going on, is that I'm trying to figure out what to do with my life. The boy-craziness? That's just a way to make it all not seem so fucking serious.

Brazen and Boy-Crazy

The Catholic revealed that he loves Led Zeppelin and somehow that made me decide that I should suggest that he call me. I certainly hope that I don't regret this brazen, brazen (and impulsive) decision. But, dude, we've been emailing for a week.

Incidentally, I may freak out if he does call and not answer the phone. I'm really not very suave with the dating stuff, you know?

Edited to add:
Well, he did not call me last evening, but today he has raised me my "you should call me" with a "we should get together for a drink." Interesting, indeed. Oh, and I'm entirely freaked out. A post will be forthcoming later in the week about all of the reasons why, which have to do mainly with the fact that most of my "dating" experience has really fallen under the headings of "hooking up" or "hanging out," which don't really include actually meeting somebody you don't know for a date but rather the practice of having sex with somebody you sort of know and then all of a sudden you're a couple. In other words, this whole thing is a whole new world for me. I mean, jeez, I haven't had a first date since 1999, and that first date happened with somebody with whom I was already pretty much involved. It was like a retroactive first date. At any rate, I am horrified by all of these things, but my horoscope today is giving me strength:

"Here is your horoscopefor Wednesday, February 22:
It's time to follow your heart. Be open and ready to go wherever it leads you. The stars say that you've been stuck in this current situation for far too long. Even if it's a little scary, it's time to move. "

High Time for a Post about Professing, I Know

I have a bunch of posts in mind that I want to write. Or maybe it's just one long post that deals with all of the issues that I'm thinking about? Somehow, though, of late, I've been consumed with things non-academic. Part of it is that I really don't want to think about the job constantly. Part of it is that it's that time of the semester, and between the absenteeism and the excuses and the freak-outs and all the other things with my students I just don't want to think about them any more than I have to. Part of it is that I am industriously procrastinating about research by doing things like cleaning my oven (and no, I'm not kidding about that). Part of it is that the Olympics have messed with my sleep schedule and so I've kind of been on automatic pilot since they began. But enough with the excuses. The bottom line is, I know I need to write a real post soon, but after taking about an hour this afternoon to try to write one, I just don't have it in me. I think I'm using all of my blogging mojo on my efforts with boys. At any rate, I promise there will be a real post soon. I've got things to say. The problem is, I'm just not in the mood to say them.

Damn You, Girl Scouts of America

Yes, my cookie order just arrived. No, I cannot eat these delicious cookies because I only worked out once last week and I cheated for like four days running. (Apparently posting about my diet/exercise success sent me into a major backslide.) I'm going to go heat up my stupid lentil soup now. And eat some string cheese. And force myself not to open the delicious cookies that I ordered and to take them home and to freeze them. Why did people invent things to eat that make us fat? Just why?

Is it Really Possible to Be Compatible with This Many People? (Boy-Crazy Post Follows)

I'm feeling a little overwhelmed, people. I thought when I decided to do this eHarmony thing that one of the benefits would be that I wouldn't be deluged with people contacting me because of the whole difficulty of matching the 29 dimensions of compatibility with other people. Apparently, however, many, many people in the world are compatible with me. And after reading my profile - even though I don't have a picture available from the beginning - they want to start communicating. I suppose I shouldn't be complaining. This is the point of the whole experiment, isn't it? That I would enter into talks with a bunch of people, and ideally meet a few of them in person, and then maybe - if things went particularly well - date some people more than once? Right?

Well. I checked my account today, and I had like 12 dudes to deal with. All I have to say is, UGH. It's hard to be excited when one feels overwhelmed. Also, I would really like Suitor #1 to suggest a meeting. If he doesn't in his next note to me, I think I'm going to suggest it. I'm sick of writing notes, already. What if we don't even like each other in person? I mean, I'm not horrified by his picture or anything, but still. This writing nonsense is just that - nonsense. What if he has a squeaky voice or a twitch or something? I need to know that.

In other news, I got rid of both the chiropractor and the guy who wants me to send him flowers. You know how I kind of hated them? Yeah, my instincts were pretty dead on with both of them, I realized when I got their most recent missives. Apparently there is something to this guided communication thing.

Oh, and somebody said they were intrigued with the guided communication. I'm not sure if I've described it before, so I'll do so now. Here's the way it goes:

1. One person contacts another and initiates communication with five multiple choice questions. A sample question (you have a bit long list to choose from) would be: "If you were taken by your date to a party where you knew no one, how would you respond? A) stay close to my date, letting him/her introduce me B) find a spot at the back bar and relax alone, letting him/her work the room C) strike out on my own, introducing myself and making friends D) I would ask my partner if I could skip this particular event E) [fill in the blank with your own answer].
2. If one likes the person's profile who has initiated contact, you answer his/her multiple choice questions and send back five multiple choice questions of your own.
3. If all goes well at this point, you trade must-haves/cant-stands with each other.
4. If all is STILL going well, you ask each other three short-answer questions. You can either make up your own, or you can choose from a long list of potential prompts.
5. If all is STILL going well, you enter into "open communication" which works like email.

So far, there are pros and cons to the guided communication. One pro is that it is possible to find out pretty quickly whether somebody really isn't for you. For example, with the sample question I provided above, a big red flag for me is if the person says they'll cling to me the whole night. (My preferred answer is that they'd like me to introduce them around but that they can then hold their own, if they write the answer in, or that they can just strike out on their own, if they choose one of the answers provided.) Another pro is that you can stop communication before you've really had extended interaction with the person, and so it seems much less painful. I've had a few dudes close off communication with me without us even communicating, and that hasn't upset me at all. Also, I've closed off communication early on with dudes and I don't feel bad about it. The cons, however, are that it does feel a bit like taking a test, and it's not particularly spontaneous. People tend to ask the same 5-8 questions for both the multiple choice and the essays, and so I feel like I'm just giving everybody my resume or something. (Incidentally, the feeling is not unlike the feeling I had when I was on the market and interviewing - a feeling like it was hard to sound genuine, even when being genuine, because you were repeating the same crap over and over again, and also a feeling like you aren't entirely sure to whom you've communicated what information, though that is helped somewhat by copying/pasting the same answers to the stupid questions that they ask.) Also, I think that the guided communication does make it somewhat weirder when you enter into open communication, though I've got a form email for that, too, now. At any rate, it's all very interesting, though at this point it is seeming like it takes a lot to make it to the stage where one might meet a person. It seems like there is a lot of room for rejection in the early phases of communication, and so perhaps one would meet fewer people ultimately than on other sites even though one is communicating (at least briefly) with a lot of people. I don't know; I'll have to see how that goes.

So, my current list of suitors (in order of level of communication, from open communication to multiple-choice questions) is as follows:

Suitor #1 - The Catholic. He is quite darling in email, but we've got to move on pretty soon, I'm thinking.

Suitor #2 - The Businessman. I don't feel strongly about him one way or the other. We have, though, entered into "open communication."

Suitor #3 - The Pilot. So lame. Still hasn't responded to the essay questions. I may dump him soon.

Suitor #4 - The Comuputer Guy. I'm trying to decide whether I'm so shallow as to reject him on the basis of picture alone. I think I might be that shallow. We'll see. I think for now I'll continue communication.

Suitor #5 - The Greek. I was really excited when he contacted me, because I had read his profile when it came in and he sounds awesome. Also, he's 6'2" which is my favorite of all possible heights for a man. I haven't seen his picture yet, though.

Suitor #6 - The Hot Guy. Well, or at least he's really photogenic. Though he does have horse teeth a little bit (ala John Elway). But yeah. He's good looking. Quite. I'm not, however, sure about his taste in books.

Suitor #7 - The Consultant. I wish I knew what he was consulting about. At any rate, I have no definite ideas about him yet.

Suitors #8 and #9 - Both are shorter than me. Is this going to be a deal-breaker? I haven't yet decided. I feel like that's a dumb thing to care about, but I just don't want to feel like I'm humungous next to a guy I'd be dating. And I feel like I would. Can I get past this?

So yes, that's the update. And unless something very exciting happens (like the arrangement of a meeting between me and one of these yahoos) I will not clog the blogosphere with anymore boy-crazy posts this week. I do think about other things, you know. (Or at least I should think about other things....)

Boy-Crazy Update

I thought you all would like to know about how things are going with the experiment in internet dating. I will organize this post in order of suitors:

Suitor #1 - the Catholic who has a career in cheese. We've been emailing back and forth. I think he wants to ask to meet. I don't think this will happen this weekend, though, because I'm busy. And because he needs to for real ask and not just do the "so, are you up to anything interesting this weekend?" thing because what's a girl supposed to do with that? At any rate, he gives good email and he called me "smarty-pants." This made me smile. I totally like a boy who teases. Oh, I suppose he's not a boy. He's 32. How old I'm getting. My parents got divorced when they were 32.

Suitor #2 - the Lame Chiropractor. I kind of hate him. But whatever. He redeemed himself a little bit earlier in the week, but now I think I may put him on hold or close him off or whatever if I don't hear from him soon. Totally on the fence with him.

Suitor #3 - the Businessman. He seems ok, but I still think that he might not be for me. Something about the vast array of fitness-related questions he's asked me. Though I did show him my picture, and he didn't reject me at seeing it. So who knows.

Suitor #4 - the Guy Who Wants Me to Send Him Flowers. Yeah, I kind of hate him, too, but I need to see his answers to his must-haves and can't-stands before I give him the ax. I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt because he's got his PhD.

Suitor #5 - the Pilot. Still no response to my essay questions. Whatever.

So yes, it's all going along. And I do like the Catholic. We'll see how things progress over the coming days and weeks. But now, I need to run errands. I'm going to a party tonight and I've got to get my costume together. (Yes, it's a costume party. Yes, I'm going as Bertha Mason from Jane Eyre. It will be awesome.)

On Hiatus from Poetry Friday, Dr. Crazy Instead Posts a Not-So-Random... Seventeen

I'm not feeling very in the mood for poetry this week, so instead I've decided to post what is lately my favorite workout playlist. It's 1 hour long:

1. Hot Boyz - Missy Elliot
2. I'm Goin' Down - Mary J. Blige
3. Johnny Sunshine - Liz Phair
4. The Rain (Supa Dupa Fly) - Missy Elliot
5. Dirt off Your Shoulder - Jay-Z
6. Gold Digger - Kanye West f/ Jamie Foxx
7. Get Ur Freak On - Missy Elliot
8. Fuck and Run - Liz Phair
9. Finding Out True Love Is Blind - Louis XIV
10. 99 Problems - Jay-Z
11. 6'1" - Liz Phair
12. Sock It To Me - Missy Elliot f/ Da Brat
13. I Just Wanna Live - Good Charlotte
14. Are You Gonna Be My Girl - JET
15. I'm With You - Avril Lavigne
16. Helena - My Chemical Romance
17. Goodbye to You - Michelle Branch

Maybe this shows how lame my taste in music can be in some cases, but whatever. I'm totally into working out to this playlist. So what if it includes Good Charlotte. That's a catchy song, dammit!

Head - Pounding - Grrrr.... (and a just a dash of boy-craziness)

So. I need to work out today. But I've got a headache. Will it go away? Can I make myself go back out to work out, even though I know I'm probably lying to myself if I say that I'll do that? It's rainy. I don't feel good. I don't like any of the food in my house (except for the fudge I bought on the way home yesterday - can you say "backslide"?).

I'm also annoyed with my suitors for their lack of attentiveness. Out of this annoyance, I just rejected a guy because he said he takes part in church activities. I was thinking about this yesterday, and I realized that if I had a choice between a religious guy (who was accepting of my lax ways) and a vegetarian I would rather go out with the religious guy because I would find a vegetarian more irritating on a daily basis. I really need somebody who understands the gloriousness of things like saussage. No, I'm not kidding. So probably I shouldn't have rejected this guy outright on the church-going alone, but whatever. Dr. Crazy is cranky.

Winter Doldrums

It's that time of the semester. Excuses from students? Coming in droves. Absenteeism? Rampant. Class discussion? Slim to none, for the most part. My research agenda? Non-existent. I'm not depressed, and I'm not unhappy. What I am is lazy. The problem is, I don't really have time to be lazy. I don't have time to watch the Olympics every night and spend oodles of time communicating with strangers on my stupid online dating service. I have an article due in just one month. I have a manuscript to whip into shape and to start shopping around. I have things I really need to do. And I don't want to waste this time and then have a spring break that is ultimately no break at all. I did that last year, thankyouverymuch, and it was absolutely no fun.

I know you're all here with me.

I blame February.

Postscript: I'll continue with the online dating related posts - per the requests of some of my readers, but I'll be sure to mark them clearly with "boy-crazy" in the subject line so that y'all who find them tiresome -as I know some of you must - can just skip right on past, should you so choose.

"I'm Not Even Sure There ARE Rockstars Anymore"

A student in one of my writing classes said this today, as we discussed Bono as a rock-and-roll celebrity. Is he a sell-out? Something else? In what way is it antithetical to talk about celebrities as role models in the context of rock-and-roll celebrity? How do our expectations for rock stars differ from those that we have for celebrity actors, athletes, or pop stars? These were the questions I wanted them to ask, that I thought they'd be invested in asking, and to have a "kid" (and I put that in quotation marks because he's probably only 10 years younger than I am) say with such seriousness that there might not even BE rockstars.... Well, it was about the most interesting thing a student has said to me this semester. And I think he might be right.

I designed my writing courses around this theme of celebrity in part to attempt to appeal to a range of students, all of whom would not have any interest at all in taking this advanced writing course but who are required to take it in order to graduate. The course is broken down into units - Defining Celebrity (for which we focused on Harry Potter both in terms of Harry's celebrity and in terms of the celebrity status of the series and of J.K. Rowling), Celebrity as Role Model or Product (the unit that we're currently finishing up, and in which we focused on Chinese basketball star Yao Ming and Bono), Celebrity and Politics (in which we'll be talking about Clinton and the Lewinsky scandal), Celebrity and Gossip (a unit focusing on the rhetorical arc of tabloids), and then the course ends with their own research on some aspect of celebrity. Ultimately, my thinking was that we'd be talking about something that could interest all of us and that has broader significance to our everyday lives. But what were/are my assumptions and what are the realities of my students. If there aren't rockstars anymore, what's really the point?

You know, we ask ourselves why students aren't engaged in politics or why students don't seem to be committed to challenging injustices or even just the status quo with which they were raised. We blame students' apathy or acceptance of social norms on helicopter parents and a culture of ultra-planned after-school activities. We blame the internets or video games or the fact that children are being tested within an inch of their lives so that none of them will be left behind.

Today, in my writing class that was pretty much designed as fluff, with a topic that would keep me going when the student writing made me want to cry, it occurred to me: Maybe the problem is that there aren't rockstars anymore. Or that students don't believe there are rockstars. That students don't care one way or another if a rockstar "sells out," nor do they necessarily see what's wrong with selling out. If these things are true, then why would students feel empowered to change anything? Why would they feel like they'd need to?

Boy-Crazy (I PROMISE I'll Do a Better Post Later Today)

Thoughts/Questions about the online dating:

1. One of my suitors writes in his profile that he wants a woman who "isn't afraid to send a card or flowers." I'm not "afraid" of that, but I AM thoughtless, which to my mind isn't the same thing. Still, I'm betting we're not a match if he's looking for a girl to send him flowers and demanding such in his profile. You know, I REALLY hate this kind of "sensitive" man for whom "sensitivity" means that they want the woman to do all of the traditionally masculine wooing things while they sit back and are pampered like a girl. Fuck that.

2. Some of these dudes move pretty quickly from in the multiple choice phase, asking things like, "how would you most like to spend saturday night?" to, in the open-ended question phase, asking things like, "will you be ready to become married and pregnant within the next six months because I'm dying to be married - DYING!" I suppose this is what I get for going on the heteronormative-land-of-traditional-values-and-belief-in-soulmates site, but jeez. Take a girl out for a meal before you interrogate her about her plans for her uterus/legal status.

3. What do I do about the chiropractor who can't stand people who use vulgar language? I mean, in my profile I say that my biggest influence was my grandmother who swore like a sailor - WHY is this guy bothering with me? Does he think that I'll give up vulgar language for him? Me? The girl whose intellectual work depends on the word fuck? (And when I say that my intellectual work depends on that word, I mean that quite literally, not just in the I-must-use-expletives-when-doing-intellectual-work sense.)

4. At what point do you start rejecting suitors? Right now, I'm in communication with (drumroll please) 7 guys. Well, six now, because I put one of them on hold because a) he asked about my uterus and b) his picture was taken either with his grandmother or his mom, and that skeezed me out. I feel like the key thing in all of this is being as open as possible and talking to/meeting as many dudes as possible. So when do I let my innate judgmentalness kick in? Most of them don't put the mom/grandma pictures up, so I don't have that as a reliable index of when to just say no.

5. I've not heard back from the pilot, and I really did like him best. What a loser. (Him, not me.)

Again, I apologize for being such a boy-crazy freak. This, if you haven't guessed, is a not-so-opaque smokescreen to disguise the fact that I've not been doing any of the research stuff I need to be doing, that I've got two letters of recommendation to write, and that it's that point in the semester where I just don't feel like doing any work. Oh, and I don't know what I'm doing with my classes this morning. I do know, however, that I'm getting a haircut today. I wonder what I'll do with it....