Tuesday, June 13, 2006

On Dating

I was talking to a friend of mine the other day. She was complaining, as girls tend to do, that she wanted a boyfriend.

Now, this is isn’t your run-of-the-mill, fag-hag, porky JAP whining that no one loves her... this girl has the kind of looks that make other women mentally ill, so her lack of boyfriend should be easily remedied.

She then went on to list all the qualities she was looking for in an ideal mate, and that’s when I realized what the problem was... she was aiming way too high. And by aiming way too high, I actually mean having any standards at all.

This isn’t Minnesota, ladies. There aren’t a million hot, straight men to each woman. There are more men than women to begin with, and of those men only about a quarter are datable (i.e. not hideous and possessing basic motor skills). Out of that quarter, only half are straight. The rest are gay or bi, which is really just gay lite. So we basically have this teeny, tiny percentage of the city’s men that we all have to fight for. Out of that tiny percentage, more than half are married or in a relationship, but that rarely takes them out of the dating pool, so we won’t count that.

NOW, with this dozen or so datable men left in the city, and all these single women, can you really afford to be asking for things like "a sense of humor" right off the bat? You can, but there are fifty other women right behind you who’ll settle for "a sense of smell".

To land a halfway decent man around here, you can’t think like a woman, you have to think like a sexual predator.

Back when I was growing up, there were two types of girls. The Stepford Wives, who always had nice, vanilla boyfriends, and the Drama Club girls who jumped from one man to another, never had boyfriends and could bed any man, or woman, they wanted. (Neither one of those groups of girls wanted anything to do with me, and I mostly sat in the corner and counted my eyelashes over and over... but I digress.) The point is, you have to go for volume, and easy targets.

A young lioness out on the plains doesn’t see a herd of wildebeests and think "Hey, I think I’ll try to catch that really virile, lively looking one leading the pack". No, she thinks... "Dude, I’m starving. I am going after which ever one I can most easily separate from the herd and pounce on."

She’s looking for the old, the very young, the feeble. Ideally one that’s a little past it’s prime and maybe won’t be able to run so fast. That’s how we should ALL be thinking about this. And, much like in the animal kingdom, remember that the ones that have just had babies are usually the easiest targets.

The other factor that I think women forget to consider is that the tried and true Stepford Wife approach isn’t going to cut it. If you want the edge on the competition, you have to master the Urban Stepford persona.

That means not only do you cook and clean, but you also love bondage and anal and three ways AND sports AND you can’t be over 27.

I know that seems like a lot is being asked of us, and it is. BUT there is a silver lining. Once you master all these skills, you can pretty much have any man you want. Once you get the swing of stalking and killing the weak, you’ll have the hunting skills necessary to capture any prey. If you happen to make a pretty good Urban Stepford Wife by nature, you’re ahead of the game, but if you don’t you really only have to fake it during the initial stages of the hunt.
Once you master these skills, you’ll be unstoppable and you can have any of the 12 datable men in the city you want. In fact, you can have two or three of them if you want.

I did it. Anyone can do it.

Unless you’re over 30, then you’re best bet is pretty much to hang out by the watering hole and hope some decent scraps get left on the carcass.