The Spark is Gone -- Should You Move On?

Of all my blog posts, none is so popular as “How to Get Over a Crush” (not even the one I did about Erin eSurance, LOL). It’s obvious this problem plagues a good portion of the population.

One of the commenters on the post raised a very good question last week, and I promised to address it with its very own post. Rachele told me about her crush on a work associate and her temptation to leave her long-time boyfriend for the man. The problem? She’s lost the romantic feelings for her boyfriend, even though she knows he loves her. But Rachele is no dummy; she recognizes that she may be chasing a dream that can never be realized.

I’m a fiction writer, not a psychologist, but you can bet I have a few things to say about Rachele’s situation. So at the risk of attracting lovelorn googlers in droves once again, I will share them with you.


Anyone can figure out that a person you don’t know as well as you know your partner can be misleadingly attractive. If s/he has enough traits that appeal to you, your romantic imagination will fill in the blanks with all kinds of irresistible qualities. Your mate, on the other hand, is very much a known quantity. You know all about his/her flaws. You’ve discovered the incompatibilities. The mystery is gone, you can’t help but take each other for granted, and you wonder if you should trade for a new model.

It may actually be possible that the new person has opened your eyes to the shortcomings of your current relationship. You may indeed have settled for less, or gotten involved for the wrong reasons, or truly grown apart. The important thing is mentally to set aside the new guy or gal, eliminate them from the decision-making process, and take a clear-headed look at the pros and cons of what you have.

The litmus test for a good, “keeper” relationship is not “spark.” Feelings of romance, adulation, and raging sexual attraction are wonderful (I should know, I write that stuff), but they are not requirements for long-term love. In fact, familiarity inevitably dims them.

Instead, look at your partner and ask yourself these ten questions:

1. Does s/he make sacrifices for you? Is the relationship one of fair give-and-take?

2. Is s/he honest, loyal, trustworthy, faithful? (That sort of person is not as commonplace as you think.)

3. Is s/he reliable, dependable, there for you even when it’s not pleasant to be so?

4. Does s/he respect you, bolster your self-esteem, treat you well in the presence of others?

5. Does s/he support you in your personal goals and believe in your ability to achieve them?

6. Do you share a similar (or mutually respectful) attitude about important issues like religion, politics, family values, having or not having children?

7. Is it typical, when the challenges of life don’t interfere, for you to enjoy being together doing just about anything?

8. Do you have a reasonable amount in common, shared interests and tastes? And for those you don’t share, do you take an interest just for the sake of the other one?

9. Can you communicate effectively in spite of your personality differences, especially when mutual understanding takes some effort? Are you both willing to put in that effort?

10. Do you have a mutually satisfying physical relationship? (This has nothing to do with any perception of “normal” or “average”; all that matters is that you are both content.)

I have had one marriage that was sorely lacking in nearly all these areas, and one that succeeds in all ten, so I know whereof I speak. My current marriage is not perfect, and yes, there was a rocky time when I was even tempted like Rachele. But enough of the ten areas were strong and healthy that it was worth it to work on those that needed improvement. On the other hand, in my first marriage (which scored about a 1 out of 10), there absolutely wasn’t enough to work with.

In my humble opinion, if you examine your current relationship and find most of these areas to be healthy, you shouldn’t throw over your partner no matter how thrillingly attractive the new person appears to you. You have a solid thing going. It may not always be exciting, vibrant, and exhilarating, but if you switch to the new love-object, in a few years (or even months) he or she will likewise lose that luster.

And the day will come soon enough, believe me, when having a caring, trustworthy, devoted best friend will mean a lot more to you than having a partner in heated romance.

For the latter, I recommend fantasy and fiction. Which brings us back to my real job. :-)

Bill Compton, Protect Me

I told you I’d be blogging about “True Blood” again soon.

Well, in my last TB post I, not surprisingly, talked about the appeal of the vampire archetype. Obviously, vampire-wise, Bill Compton has it going on. He’s a real master of looking out of the tops of his eyes, he’s dangerous but charming, he’s half a beast, half a fine Southern gentleman.

As if that weren’t enough, the show lets him play a second and equally alluring role: the Knight in Shining Armor. A vampire in shining armor? Sure! You’ve seen it before in the pivotal and classic moment when Edward Cullen saves Bella from being crushed between two vehicles. The nifty side benefit of those vampiric powers is that they can be used to save damsels in distress.

And who’s in more distress than True Blood’s Sookie? The townsfolk think she’s crazy, the local young ne’er-do-wells are hot for her, and the neighborhood vampires have her in their sights. She may be brave and tough and spunky, but that doesn’t help when you’re outnumbered or outweighed by a hundred pounds. Or the assailant has supernatural powers.

Ah, but no worries: there’s Bill.


Bill, delightfully, is defined by the values and manners of the Old South (without that nasty racism of course). He is courteous, deferential, and painstakingly polite. And like any well-bred, properly-raised Southern boy, he puts women on a pedestal. They are to be watched over, guarded, protected, fought for even to the death.

No modern guy could behave in such a way—talk about politically incorrect. But due to his temporal displacement, Bill can get away with it with our blessing and admiration. Thank heavens! Because it’s absolutely wonderful and you’re not going to find a man like this anywhere in the 21st Century.

So Bill expresses his love for Sookie in Shining Armor fashion: vigilantly, and with preternatural thoroughness, he watches over her. When a threat appears, he’s on the scene in nearly the speed of light. He intervenes, wielding not anything so prosaic as reason, legal threats, or even a handgun, oh no…he wields his deadly fangs and supernatural strength.

Tell me, what woman doesn’t, somewhere in her soul if not all over it, want a man like this in her corner?

Not only that, but the passion with which Bill defends Sookie is so intense, it’s obviously not simply a matter of duty. It’s very, very personal, a fact reinforced when he employs the words “she’s mine” to fend off other vampires. [And I just love how the plot of this story makes it possible for a man to say of a woman, “she’s mine” and a woman to say “I’m his” and get away with it, with the female audience’s enthusiastic support. Very clever.]

Wow. So intense. The reaction of viewers to this show demonstrates to me that as great as the equality of the sexes is in nearly every respect, when it comes to sex and romance, a whole lot of us crave a trip in the Wayback Machine to the 19th Century. We’d love our own personal Knight in Shining Armor…or better still, a Creature of the Night in Shining Armor like Bill.

Why Nice Girls Go for Bad Boys

A friend and fan of mine, let's call him Adam, emailed me in response to my last post about Ben Linus. Adam wondered, why the heck is it that women are so attracted to villains? He recounted a story of dating a woman with a history of abuse, and treating her kindly and well for a change, only to have her end up returning to her previous nasty boyfriend.

Adam is not alone, that's for sure. I know so many men who grew up believing the best way to woo a girl was to be nice to her, only to find out that like in so many areas of life, nice guys finish last with chicks. So they wonder, what is the deal with females? These ladies can't really be gluttons for punishment, can they?

My answer to that is, no, women are not after punishment when they fall for Bad Boys. On the contrary, they are out for rewards, in one or both of two key ways:

1. Bad Boys make up for our having to be so darn good. I've talked about this one a lot. Traditionally, girls are raised to be cooperative, empathetic, nurturant, willing to compromise and sacrifice their own needs. Having had to stifle self-interest, women are fascinated by males who live their lives selfishly and independently. Such men are everything we Good Girls are not: they break the rules, ignore convention, and do whatever they damn well please. In the great tradition of "opposites attract," these guys draw women like moths to flame. Just being around them is exciting, liberating, and arousing. Sure, there's a price to be paid--ill treatment--but to a point, it's an acceptable price.

2. There is nothing more satisfying than reforming a Bad Boy. I honestly think this is what's behind most of the truly "hard cases" of women hooked on cruel men. I haven't spent as much time discussing this one, so let's focus on it today.

There's a saying that goes, "Women marry men hoping to change them; men marry women hoping they won't change." Ever wonder why women so often have this agenda? Well, historically speaking, while men were busy with government, commerce, the professions, etc., women had to focus on homemaking. Therefore, if a woman was to feel fulfilled, and earn a sense of accomplishment, she had to do it by shaping the household. One key element of that was making improvements upon her husband.

Really, if you marry a nice guy, what challenge is there in that? It's already his nature--you can't take any credit for it. But if you adopt a Bad Boy, and by your love and effort and charms manage to reform him, that really proves something. It proves that this guy, who came to you all anti-social and dysfunctional, was transformed by his love for you. Could there be anything more flattering and self-affirming to a gender restricted largely to homemaking?

Nowadays it's easier for women to find fulfillment in arenas outside the home, but after thousands of years of behavior patterns, we are not going to change our propensities overnight.

Okay, now let's apply this principle to a couple of examples. In Example 1, you're Cinderella and the guy is Prince Charming. He's pretty much perfect when you meet him: brave, with a fine sense of duty, perfect manners, and the ability to ballroom dance to boot. Once you overcome the nasty people trying to keep the two of you apart, and achieve Happily Ever After, the story's over. And what have you accomplished? You tell yourself, "Hey, I won the heart of a nice guy"; but especially to the young and inexperienced, it seems like if you had faced more of a challenge you would feel even better about yourself.

Flip side: for Example 2, let's go back to Ben Linus. It's hard to be certain, but he seems like a lonely, f'ed up, megalomaniacal misfit. He's duplicitous, selfish, tricky and untrustworthy. Imagine then if you could be the woman who heals his emotional wounds, meets his unmet needs, and transforms him into a whole and healthy person. Now that's an accomplishment! And imagine how grateful Ben would be to you! You are truly his salvation, his whole world. You did what no one before you could do. You're amazing!

And that's how it works, Adam, my friend. When your girlfriend's nasty ex came after her again, she thought, "See, he needs me, he misses me, he can't live without me. I am changing him!" And of course she couldn't turn her back on him then, just when he was displaying evidence of this glorious transformation-by-love! Why should she stay with you, a nice, integrated, whole person, and take the easy road? There's a man out there who just can't make it without her!

Of course he was just acting that way for the moment, to get her back for sex, cleaning, cooking, a sympathetic ear, etc. Of course it all went bad again. But she was willing to risk it, just in case. And until everything fell through, she could once again glory in the feeling of being with a Bad Boy.

In a horrible way it makes sense, doesn't it?

So what's a nice guy like Adam to do? Hang in there and stay true to your nice self. Most women do wise up (there are three in my family who did, for example). Women are not actually stupid, nor are they masochists. Eventually they learn the lesson that the pain a Bad Boy causes more than offsets the pleasure he offers, and then they start looking for a man who will treat them well.

Which, by the way, is what ended up happening to my friend Adam. Because although Bad Boys may finish first in the sprints, life happens to be a marathon.

[About the illustration for today's post: This is a drawing I found of devil Crowley and angel Aziraphale, two characters from the book Good Omens. I find this depiction of a bad boy and a nice guy who are both attractive really fascinating. So do many artists, it would appear (just search Deviant Art for "Good Omens" and see). Anyway, this drawing was done by the fabulously talented Linnpuzzle]

Bad Boys, Good Guys, and Ben Linus

My daughters and I recently discussed the experiences all three of us have now endured, regarding the transition from Bad Boys to Good Guys. I dare say we are in good company in that regard.

Women often dig guys that treat them mean. It's complicated. I've discussed the attraction of the Bad Boy archetype at some length, both here on the blog and in my other columns, so I won't go into his special charms again here.

But the thing is, many of us have our first significant relationship with a guy who is less than kind. Some of us never get past it, and repeat the mistake over and over. But a lot of us learn from the experience. We recognize that Bad Boys can be charming, and sexy, and exciting, but in the end are just not worth it. They may offer thrills, giddy emotions, and hot sex...but the trade-off for a Good Guy, who gives you support, respect, understanding, and nurturance, is totally worth it.

My daughters and are all currently in relationships of various stages, from second date to six months to 15 years of marriage, all with nice guys. None of them are the kind who walk into a bar and turn heads; but all of them are perfectly attractive and very sweet guys. Do we three still find ourselves attracted to Bad Boys? You bet. Would we be with one? Hell's no.

So...what about Benjamin Linus? Well, Lost fans, I was thinking about all the stuff reinterated above, and I realized something that may account for the irresistible power this character has over so many women. Paradoxically (and isn't the Island always good for another paradox?), Ben is both Bad Boy and Good Guy at once.

This has been true from his very first appearance on the show. Remember when he swore he was just another castaway, an innocent guy named Henry Gale? No matter how many reasons we had to think he was lying, he was really some sort of evil mastermind, there was always that chance he really was a nice man. This has remained his shtick ever since. Just when you think he truly is pursuing a higher goal, he really may be the savior of all our heroes, he pulls some nasty stunt like a mass murder.

But meanwhile, just when he's rubbed out his latest enemy in cold blood, we become convinced he did it for some higher reason: true love, maybe...or to save countless other lives. He can just seem so damn sincere. With Ben, somehow duplicity comes across as genius, outrageous gall seems like courage, lying seems like, well, impressive outsmarting. In his most recent outing, Ben murdered Major Good Guy John Locke with his bare hands...and yet, all the while I watched the act, I was saying to myself, "This has to be for a good reason. I mean, it has to be. Right?"

So, with Ben Linus we women get to have our cake and eat it too. We can feel all tingly when Ben fools everyone with his latest lie, and all fluttery when he orders people around. But in the next minute we can honestly entertain the belief that in the end, Ben could save everyone we love on this show. We can feel pathos when he gets brutally beat up yet again (how many times has it been now? Surely some devoted fan is keeping count). And in the next scene we can marvel at how it seems every string in the plot is pulled by Benjamin Linus the Master Puppeteer.

I'm not sure I can think of a better example in any fictional medium of a man being Hero and Villain virtually simultaneously. And I have to believe it is this complex hybrid of the two archetypes that keeps women fascinated by Ben.

There are a lot of plot lines up in the air on Lost, but for my money, the one I look most forward to seeing resolved in a couple more years is this: Is Ben Linus a Bad Boy or a Good Guy? I am so hoping for the latter, but in the meantime, it's his role as the former that keeps me glued to his scenes.

Funny how that works.

[Ben Linus fans, please see also my original Ben post: "Please Tell Me Why I Love Ben Linus"]

Torn Between Two Lovers

Last night on “Lost,” the writers set up a very nice new love triangle. Sawyer, who fell for Kate but never established a relationship with her, has been pining during the three years of their separation (he’s on the Island, she’s back in civilization). Well, actually, he’s been simultaneously pining for Kate and falling in love with Island cohort Juliet. Imagine Sawyer’s predicament when, still flushed from Juliet’s latest embraces, he finds Kate & Co. have returned to the island.

The love triangle is a plot device that never grows old.

Usually the focus in this kind of story line is on the competition between the two individuals fighting for the love of the third. For example, in the past “Lost” had a storyline about Jack and Sawyer competing for Kate. There’s endless fun in that kind of plot line, as you root for your favorite to win out.


But on the flip side, it’s also fun to focus on the person who is in love with two people at once. I think this may be the female equivalent of a three-way, in fact. Rather than fantasizing about having sex with two men at once (not that we never do that, it’s just not like with men who constantly do that), we imagine having two men in love with us. It certainly wouldn’t suck to have that happen.

Interestingly, it’s also fun to imagine being in love with two people at the same time. Why is that? Never being short on theories about sex and romance, I am happy to explain. This situation makes for not one but two affairs that are illicit. When you’re with one guy, you’re wronging the other, and ditto. Remember that old 70s song by Mary MacGregor, “Torn Between Two Lovers”? There was a line in the chorus that went, “Lovin' both of you is breakin' all the rules.” And as we know, there’s nothing more fun than breaking all the rules.

Another factor in such a scenario is our sense that “true love is never wrong.” A person can honestly feel okay about cheating if it’s done out of true love. While we’re quoting old pop songs, “If loving you is wrong, I don’t want to be right.” There’s enough justification that springs from the happiness we bring each party, that it makes the misery we inflict upon the other worthwhile.

I always reflect back on one of the coolest ongoing nocturnal fantasies I’ve ever had (it actually appears in my story “The Storytellers” in Soulful Sex: The Darker Side), which was this sort of triangle. I was simultaneously involved with the Emperor Caligula and a Roman centurion, agonizingly torn between the two. In both cases the men needed me desperately, which made me feel I simply had to stay with both at once.

The whole triangle thing is delightful on so many levels. It is, of course the heart of my more recent fantasy about Mister House and the Man in the Black Coat, which you’ll recall from my blog post about the insane complexity of my fantasies. I’ve actually picked up on that fantasy again recently. It’s just so fun watching the two men get jealous about each other. And I get to feel deliciously guilty when I’m with one and knowing I’m betraying the other. AND I get to be needed and adored by two guys at once.

Honestly, men just don’t know how to construct a proper three-way fantasy. Sex between three people is so lame by comparison to the complex, delectable thrills of being torn between two lovers.

And may I add that “Lost” (which is having the most enthralling season ever, IMHO) now has the pieces in place for an actual love square. Kate and Juliet have each had both Jack and Sawyer in love with them, so the potential here is stupendous. Throw into the mix Ben’s longstanding obsession with Juliet and...talk about love tangles, yikes!

I say, bring it on.

[Warning label for this post: The author does not in any way recommend or endorse the practice of love triangles in real life. Been there, done that, wish I hadn’t!]

Sex, Guys and Video Games, Part 2

Last time, you remember, we left my husband Davie engrossed in another fun evening of playing his computer game, “The Witcher.”

I stopped in for a visit to the bedroom and observed my usual minute or two of game-playing, then asked him some typically inane questions like “Is that a wyvern?” and “Are there any cats in this game?” Davie answered me patiently as always. Then he remarked, “You know what’s interesting about this game? I’m allowed to have sex with any named character except Carmen, and I only want to have sex with Carmen.”

Typical of a guy, hey? It’s the unattainable chick that gets his interest.

Suddenly I realized that by grilling Davie with questions about the sex in this game, I could probably get a new and interesting peek into the male psyche. So I did, and I did, and here are the highlights:

Carmen, in being off-limits, is the ultimate in desirability. Carmen is the madam of the local house of prostitution. Having completed a favor for her (he got rid of some thug), all Davie has to do to hire any of the ladies is to give that girl flowers. (Imagine if Vegas operated like this. Bad for pimps, good for florists.) Just to clarify, Carmen’s pretty hot, but so are many of the other characters. There’s just something irresistible about the forbidden. And meanwhile, guys--being competitive--just love whatever they have to work at to win.

Archetypes are at play. Davie was fine with helping out Carmen--he loves doing nice things for pretty women. But he has no interest in hanging with the ho’s. It doesn’t matter what they look like in the game, it’s what they represent: and Davie has never liked obviously seductive types. He’s the kind to prefer a girl who wears an oversized tee shirt to bed over a Victoria’s Secret model. So not being into the prostitute archetype, he just says no. Now another game player who’s into dirty girls might take a different tack. It’s whatever floats your boat, in games or in real life.

But curiosity trumps all. Davie’s not into in-your-face seductresses, so he doesn’t like vampire ladies much either. However, given the opportunity to do the deed with three vampire chicks, he thought, “Heck, why not?” He just wanted to see how it would all go down. (I guess it was a bit disappointing.) In fact, curiosity was what first convinced Davie to see what sex in the game was like. His first opportunity was with a character named Triss, and Triss was hot, so he thought, why not find out what it’s like? Curiosity is a big motivator with guys in general; it’s why they are so inexplicably tormented by not knowing what everyone’s breasts in the world look like naked.

A relationship does really mean something. There is one character in the game who really does establish a romance with our alter ego/hero Geralt: Shani. She was the second character who “offered herself,” and the fact that Davie had gotten to know her, and she was nice, and she liked him, definitely increased his interest.

Being a rescuer stirs the libido. Davie also admitted that doing helpful acts for female characters works as an aphrodisiac. It wasn’t Carmen’s inaccessibility alone that drew him to her; he confessed he didn’t have an interest until after he performed that favor for the madam. That relationship also made her more real and less a “shady lady” to him. Generally speaking, having performed the “knight in shining armor” function for a girl made him more interested in making love to her.

It’s not so much conquest as accomplishment. As I explained in my previous post, in this game, when you have sex with a character, you win a character card to keep in your collection of weapons and treasures. If you install the “European patch,” these cards are actually a little graphic. Now on its face this seems uncomfortable like adding notches to one’s belt. Think about it though: How can a guy feel like he’s racking up conquests when the game is simply written this way? No, the phenomenon becomes a variation on that theme of male competitiveness: accomplishment. Kind of like merit badges in Boy Scouts.


Which is not to say looks don’t count. The motivation to win these cards really is enhanced by the hot pictures. What was interesting to hear, though, was Davie’s disappointment that they do not accurately enough resemble the characters in the game itself. I guess interacting with these 3D animated hot chicks kind of builds up a personalized yearning, and if the payoff is a little bit off, it’s disappointing. Kind of like when you Google Image search some celebrity and the thumbnail looks really good, and then it turns out the picture is actually some fan’s bad rendering of the celebrity. C’mon, that’s happened to you too, right?

So, bottom line, it’s fortunate “The Witcher” is a really good adventure game, because it fails almost utterly as porn. Which is all right with Davie and also with me.

I don’t care if there’s a cat house or not. However, I do think it needs cats.

Sex, Guys and Video Games, Part 1

Seeing as my last post was a bit estrogen-fueled, I thought I’d treat you on my next two posts to thoughts from the male point-of-view. I interviewed my husband David about a topic near and dear to his heart, computer games, with a view of course to the erotic aspect of the medium. The things I found out were fascinating on two levels: first, there’s the interesting approach (or lack thereof) that the gaming industry takes to sex. Second (which I’ll talk about next time) there’s everything you learn concerning a guy’s feelings about sex from how he plays “The Witcher.”

“The Witcher,” it seems, is one of the few computer games that includes any sexual content at all. And in order to get that content to even include a tiny bit of nudity, U.S. users have to download the European patch to the game. Installing this patch enables gamers to have more graphic blood, as well as see a little T&A.

The sexually graphic content comes in the forms of the little cards you earn for sleeping with women in the game, and in the patched version, those cards show your conquests in more revealing garb and poses. The standard U.S. version depicts these women characters with “offending” features covered up.

Lest you get the misconception that this game focuses on sex, let me say right now that that’s not at all the case. “The Witcher” is a typical D&D style fantasy game where you, in the guise of heroic Geralt, go on a series of medieval quests, slaying monsters and outwitting evil forces while building up your powers and collecting tools and treasures. It’s just that in this game, en route you are permitted to have sex with the female characters if you so choose. Well, all of them but Carmen, madam of the local brothel--she’s off limits. (More on that next time.)


Not only is the sex something of an unnecessary side trip, it’s pretty lame when it happens. The “seductions” last a few seconds, you see a romantic bedside embrace, and then the game shows the same three seconds of identical gauzy footage for every encounter. I know that your average man like to get right to it, but this is too brief for my husband and I’m sure he’s not alone. Especially considering the lack of payoff.

Well, the true “prize” for having sex is getting the character card. These ladies are pretty hot, and their cards are nicely done graphics-wise. I personally wouldn’t need the European patch, but then, I’m a girl. I can understand why guys would get it, that’s for sure.

And that’s all there is. That’s all there is in one of the most graphic, sex-oriented games out there, which is of course rated M. I’m really amazed that with the technology we have at our fingers nowadays, no companies are producing hotter stuff than this. Heck, you’d think somebody would develop a Sims-style brothel game where you can design your own “companions”! (I am highly suspicious that this is what a lot of guys who own 3D-people-creation software, like DAZ, use the programs for.)

But then I thought about it. You know, you can only sell what you can get to market. That is, if someone designs a product but no one is willing to produce it, what’s the point? With all the flack the gaming industry has gotten over leading little boys to acts of violence, they have a reputation to protect, and most gaming companies wouldn’t touch such a project. Davie told me there was a huge uproar when a mod for graphic sex with a prostitute was available in one of the Grand Theft Auto games. It wasn’t a legitimate part of the game, but the files were available for unlocking by clever hackers, so that got the game manufacturer in lots of hot water.

Anyway, if someone did publish “Sims Have Sex,” who would sell it? Certainly not Best Buy or Target or the Game Spot at your local mall. Not even comic books stores would want to, knowing moms from the neighborhood would picket their shops immediately.

Besides, this is what the porn industry is for. The gaming industry is for gaming.

When David started playing “The Witcher,” he had no plan to take the little “sex side trips.” He plays these games for the fun of doing heroic deeds, crushing huge monsters, and becoming a demi-godlike creature. It was only out of curiosity that he tried it, and then decided to repeat the scenario with other characters in sort of a “collect-’em-all” spirit. Really, the inclusion of the sex feature was not at all a selling point for him.

So I guess this all goes to explain why computer games have so little sexual content. And I’m not saying they should, I’m just intrigued by the phenomenon. After all, here you have a phenomenon fueled by testosterone, produced nearly completely by males for males, and there’s virtually no graphic sex to be found.

Things that make you go “huh.”

Well, in my next post things get even more interesting as we delve into the psyche of Davie, as revealed by his exploits playing “The Witcher”!

An Online Tool for Getting in a Romantic Mood

Well, I thought I’d just be topical, and post something relevant to a certain holiday that’s coming right up. Whether or not you and your significant other observe Valentine’s Day (and it may amuse you to know that yours truly, Ms. Erotica-with-Soul, actually doesn’t), being romantic is never a bad thing.

Whether you need some more spice in the bedroom, or are simply sick of winter and need a pick-me-up, romantic thoughts can help. And this week I was introduced to a very nice resource for all things romantic, a website called http://www.romantic-ideas-online.com/. The proprietress, one Sara McGoodwin, just started this site and already has done a great job with it. I realize romantic tastes vary, but if you are partial to a sweet, colorful, Victorian look (and I dig that), just being on the site will romanticize your mood.

(For proof of the similarities in taste between Ms. McGoodwin and myself, just take note that she uses the same painting of Psyche and Eros on her home page as I put on the cover of Soulful Sex Volume I!)

So for starters, Romantic-Ideas-Online will serve as a romantic mood enhancer, providing art, poems, stories and song lyrics following the theme. You can just poke around the site and find yourself reminded of your own romantic touchstones. (Sara and I both love the song “Goodnight My Someone” from “The Music Man.”) To ensure a steady supply of this kind of goodies, the site suggests you subscribe to a newsletter that shares Sara’s original romantic vignettes.

It also gets practical. There are romantic gift ideas A-Z, and they’re not just for Valentine’s Day. In fact, the site provides a list of occasions to give such gifts. There are tips for keeping love alive and improving relationships, ideas for romantic dates, etc. And no romance website would be complete without recommendations for good romantic reading, which abound on Sara’s pages. (Am I listed? Well, yes . LOL)

What I like about Sara is she gets pretty creative with the subject matter. I found instructions on how to make a “Love Slave Jar” (doesn’t that sound like fun?). Sara also created several sets of downloadable, printable romantic coupons (exchangeable for things like “sexual fantasy” and “get out of the doghouse free”) that would make great easy and nice gifts, and she did a lovely job designing them. The site includes a genuine potpourri of musings both reproduced and original about the wonders of love.


Calling herself a “romantic glutton,” Ms. McGoodwin has made it her mission to use her website to help visitors “turn up the volume on your own True Romantic Adventure.” It would seem she’s walking the walk as well as talking the talk, and I hope she’ll continue to build and enhance the site.

What better time to visit such a place than February, huh?

[P.S., this post was pretty estrogen-heavy; next time I write you’ll be hearing more from the male angle!]

Musings on Sex Appeal

Who doesn't want to be sexy? Well, who over the age of 12, that is? I think even elderly people want to remain somehow attractive to the opposite sex. If you consider 52 elderly, I can personally vouch for it. I recognize (sadly) that the tools one can employ in the pursuit of sexiness become more and more limited as one ages. Bare midriff tops are no longer in my arsenal. Nevertheless, I still pursue sexiness in an age-appropriate sort of way.

Yesterday I read another interesting WikiHow article, this time on "How to Be Hot." The tips were good ones, from how to dress to how to think. The article closed with the advice that if you, for whatever reason, can't do "hot," there's no shame in going for other forms of attractiveness, like cute or distinguished. Again, the key is feeling that you are appealing to other humans, that they will be motivated to want to be around you.

Meanwhile, yesterday was an interesting one for my family, as my older daughter was in a competition to be selected as one of twenty local singles for an upcoming feature in the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel. (She made it, by the way!) Katie's photo and some personal remarks were included. I figured her remarks were friendly and charming, and her photo would be the clincher. Sure enough, the top vote-getting girls all were pretty and approachable.


Well, it so happens one of the top vote-getting guys was a fellow named John, age 71. I'm sure a lot of ladies, myself included, were tickled that this guy entered the competition at all. What a go-getter. Granted, our votes didn't exactly mean we'd date him, but we'd certainly go out for beers with him. And at 71, that's endorsement enough! So John beat out some hot 20-somethings, and more power to him.

Second meanwhile: Yesterday I discovered Crest was promoting its White Strips product by creating a site where you can experience "virtual 3D kisses" from your choice of male or female. (Visit http://kissmein3d.com/.) I have to give kudos to Crest, both the guy and the girl did it for me! LOL Seriously though, I was amazed how the flirtatious moves of "Fernando," directed right at me from the screen, set my heart a-flutter. His kisses (there are six different ones) are really a little mini-seminar in how to spark a woman's libido. (Please excuse the 3D effects in the screen cap below.)


Well, I'm not going to turn this post into my own tips for being sexy...that ground has been covered well enough by others with more expertise than I. The point is, the whole issue is not going to go away and is a part of life. Those of us who can't compete on the level of Hollywood celebrities, due to genetics, age, or both, are not exempt. And rather than bash our heads into the wall, or rather, mirror, we need to remember that anyone can do things to encourage others to want to be near them. It's amazing how "alluring" things like kind words, thoughtful attire, humor, little gifts of food or homemade crafts, smiles, welcoming body language, empathy, camaraderie, or a well-timed hug can be.

Those things are not "sexy" in the classic sense, but they bring people closer together nonetheless. Close = good in my book.

Last Night I Hit That...

One of my favorite lines from a TV show last year occurred on "House MD." The long-awaited kiss between Drs. House and Cuddy finally occurred, and was actually rather romantic. However, the next day at the hospital, House downplayed the event by tipping his head toward Cuddy and telling his team, "Last night I hit that and now she's all up in my jock."

I can't tell you why I found this so hilarious, except that it was completely unexpected, and well, I always find House hilarious. Meanwhile, however, the irony is that in general I find this attitude toward sex pretty annoying.

Don't get me wrong, I'm no prude. While I've never indulged in a one-night stand, I've had a couple short flings and am certainly capable of being shallow about sex from time to time. I also understand the human insecurities that prompt us to downplay our romantic encounters out of a desire to protect our egos (which clearly was House's motivation, and made it therefore forgivable). But what does irk me is when the objectification of the sex partner becomes a regular and chronic practice, when every lover is referred to with an impersonal pronoun, as in "I hit that."

Casual sex is the oldest act in the world. I have no reason to believe it's any more prevalent now than in any other age. However, the words our society uses to describe sexual activities currently don't exactly thrill me. "I hit that" is funny in contexts like the one on "House," but when it honestly expresses the sentiment that the sex partner was no more than a toy with flesh, it's actually pretty sad.

And while I'm not one to criticize the vernacular generally, I'm not a big fan of "hooked up" either. I'm not sure why exactly...I guess it just sounds so mechanical, and well, almost boring. "Hooked up" conjures up this picture of two people saying to each other, "Well, I'm here, you're here, we're horny, why not?" There's no seduction--heck, it doesn't even sound like there's much fun involved!

"Getting it on" at least sounds energetic. "Making out" sounds goal-oriented and like you are happy about succeeding. "Pitching woo" and "making whoopee" are cute and silly, which is still an improvement. "Hooking up" just sounds so intentionally temporary, so unmotivated, so dull. Even when a friend exclaims excitedly "You mean you guys actually hooked up?" the excitement is ironic. You might as well be jumping up and down as you say, "You guys ran into each other at the mall?" or "You guys ended up on the same elevator?"

I understand that words are just words, and the affect behind what is being said is what matters. But I can't help but wonder why this kind of phraseology prevails at the moment. Is everyone so highly motivated to make sure the significance of any sexual encounter is downplayed? Is that because we really don't take sex seriously, or because we do, and therefore we are terrified other people will find out it matters to us?

It was pretty plain on that episode of "House" that the doctor did care about having kissed Cuddy, so much so that he made a point of belittling the encounter at his earliest possible opportunity. And I suspect that's the most common reason for the nonchalance of our current sexual terminology.

Heaven forbid we should call it "making love," hey? :-)

How to Get Over a Crush

I’m a big fan of wikiHow, and this morning one of the “how-to” topics offered by this great site was “How to Stop Having an Inappropriate Crush.” Some of the advice in this posting was quite helpful, don’t get me wrong. But I have a feeling that a lot of people hoping to get help from this wikiHow will be disappointed.

The main premise of the article was “Having a crush on someone is not the problem. The real issue is your own restraint and self-control.” In my experience, most people are okay with exercising restraint when they are obsessed with the wrong person. Most times it’s painfully obvious there’s no way you can act on your feelings. You can’t hit on your married boss, you can’t ask out Robert Pattinson. You don’t need someone to tell you, like in this article, to focus on all the reasons why your crush is hopeless. Usually that’s painfully obvious.

I suspect people googling “how to get over a crush” are most interested in making the feelings go away. Unfortunately, the article only addressed the issue this way: “If you’ve tried to fight it, all to no avail, and you still find yourself sighing over him/her, then make it right.” Well, there’s usually no way to “make it right”—your boss is happily married, and Robert Pattinson is not going to go out with you.

As a person who has experienced four decades of inappropriate crushes, I can only speak from my own personal experience and share what has helped me. So here goes:

1. Don’t make yourself feel worse by beating yourself up. Having a crush is not a sin, it’s just feelings, and people can’t help their feelings. Infatuations are a natural part of being human, and no one is exempt. If you’re crushing on the next door neighbor in spite of your being happily married, don’t interpret it as a sign your marriage is failing. As the saying goes, you are married, not dead. You will still respond emotionally to attractiveness in other males, and that says nothing about the strength of your marriage.

2. Try to keep in mind that you are probably not really in love with a real person, but rather you are in love with what him/her represents to you. This is especially the case with celebrity crushes, but usually just as true with other infatuations. As you read this, you may be balking at the idea, but that’s because you don’t want to let go of the hope that this “awesome person” is really as awesome as they seem to you. But read on as to why what I’m telling you is actually good news.

3. Work on disassociating the idea of the person you adore from the flesh-and-blood individual. Think about this: have you ever really loved a character in a book? Thought about actually being with that person? Wasn’t it fun to imagine, even though you knew full well that wonderful character was just “pretend”? Well, your fantasies about your crush are like that. If you find it hard not to fantasize about the person, work on being happy just enjoying pretending about them. And remember, in real life, being with the person would doubtless not be as wonderful as your fantasies, in which you can imagine him/her as perfect for you.

4. Rejoice that the pretend version of your crush truly does belong to you. As my regular blog readers know, I’m a believer in the theories of psychoanalyst Carl Jung (and I wrote a book about this stuff called Living Beyond Reality). Jungian psychology teaches that each of us has an opposite sex aspect to our personality buried in the unconscious, called the animus/anima. The only way we interact with that “person,” that lost part of our psyche, is by projecting it on others. If the object of your infatuation seems perfect for you, that’s because you’re projecting your animus/anima upon him/her, seeing those qualities your soul most longs for, your very heart’s desire. No wonder it’s so wrong, but feels so right! Well, it takes lots of practice, but you can learn to recognize that the person you feel you adore is not actually Robert Pattinson, but this inner male ideal that is, in a real sense, your soul mate. He’s already yours, always has been, always will be. He is an autonomous part of yourself, you and yet not you.

I realize #4 is a very new concept to most people, but believe me, if you can get your mind around it, nothing works better for dealing with inappropriate crushes. If you find the idea just too far out there, then go back to #3, which is just another version of #4. The point is to diminish the pain of your crush by feeling like you have control. Rather than pining for someone you can’t have, you take the whole thing into the realm of imagination, where all the control belongs to you.

If you still don’t like the idea of letting go of “the real person,” I suggest you take a cold, hard look at the real person and try to find his/her flaws. Because I guarantee you, there are things about that guy or girl that would disappoint you if you really had to live with him or her. Apply yourself conscientiously to this exercise and you’ll figure out that your pretend version of the person is actually more fun “to be with,” even if you have to sacrifice the benefits of real flesh-and-blood.

Here’s one bonus tip for you: If you feel any interest going on in your mind towards a less problematic individual, then try to redirect your attention there. It’s the basic principle that “the universe abhors a vacuum”...it’s hard to replace a crush with nothing, but substituting a different crush can work. So, for example, if you’re pining for Robert Pattinson, see if you can’t obsess instead on the character of Edward Cullen as you personally dream him to be.

Dealing with a troublesome crush is never easy! But there are things you can do to help yourself. Good luck!

ADDENDUM 8/31/09: As you can see by the abundance of comments to this post, a lot of people have come to me with specific advice for their problems. Before you post asking for my help, I want to remind you that I'm just an author, and this post was meant to share some concepts that have been helpful to me and may be helpful to you. If you are truly tormented by an infatuation you can't shake, PLEASE SEE A PROFESSIONAL. I feel for you, but I'm severely limited in my ability to help...this is just a blog, and I'm just a fellow human wanting to present some tips that might work for you.

How Many Times We Did It

Okay, by “it,” I really do mean “it.”

This weekend the family was discussing a unique party we had about 13 years ago, a type of party I can’t help but wonder may be the only one of its kind in human history. If you have ever attended a similar one, by all means let me know—I’d love to hear about it.

It was my and Davie’s 500 Party, celebrating our 500 times.

Whenever we tell people about this festive gathering (and no, we don’t tell everyone), the spoken or unspoken question is always, “You keep count?” My ready answer is, “Please keep in mind that I was married for 15 years to a gay guy before my marriage to David.” Yes, I keep count to this day. Kinda funny, but when you’ve been counting up to 500, you really feel like you might as well keep track.

So, how does one hold a 500 Party? Well, you don’t want to be tacky about it. Although…I will admit it was a little tacky for me to sing “We’ve had sex 500 times and we’ll have sex 500 more” to the tune of that 1988 hit by The Proclaimers. But mostly we simply sported our simple “500” buttons and put “500” signs on the lawn.

The only possible controversy arises concerning the involvement of my daughters, then ages 15 and 12, in the party prep. As they were piping 500’s in frosting onto a couple dozen brownies, they were not ignorant of the meaning of the party theme. They were also aware of how crazy (in a completely healthy way, of course) our particular gang of friends would get at said party. But our crew was a bunch of fun-loving, perfectly functional, responsible adults and they were all really fond of the girls. Which is not to say we didn’t consider it best that they spent the night elsewhere.

So, to that mix add food, plenty of beer, and some great 80s music, and that’s a 500 Party.

My older daughter likes to joke that things like this “scarred her for life.” But she was actually no more embarrassed about it than any of the other things that embarrassed her about me when she was 15. As in, “Mom, PLEASE don’t dance.” Her sister said the other day, “I’ve always been really glad that you guys were so open about it, like there was nothing to be ashamed of. It made me feel comfortable talking about that stuff with you.”

And that, really, was the general idea. As much as Davie and I are private about this stuff, and very monogamous and trusting, and as much as we take sex very seriously, we are also big believers that it is nothing to be ashamed of. If a married couple can’t have a couple dozen friends over to celebrate a great occasion like 500, then what is the world coming to?

For me, especially, it was a wonderful and happy thing. I imagine most old married couples take for granted that they make love regularly, but if you are like me, you don’t. There was a time when my acceptance of being married to a gay man (and why I accepted that is a long story) had me convinced I would never have male physical affection, much less sex, in my life again. So I treasure greatly both the number we are at now (wouldn’t you like to know?) as well as the approximately 5,000 cuddle cabs (as we call snuggling at night).

And OMG, as I type this the PC radio is playing that old 500 Miles Proclaimers song. What are the odds of that? I guess I was supposed to tell you this story today.

Panic over Porn

I recently became aware of some controversy concerning the availability of Playboy and Penthouse magazines to U.S. troops overseas. People react in all kinds of ways to the idea of army PXs offering explicit materials like these to soldiers. There are many who are appalled at the idea, saying it encourages perverted behavior. Many others feel that such materials are a comfort to lonely men far from home, and providing access to them is the least we can do for those in harm’s way.

It’s panic over porn, and resolving issues that involve sex is never easy. Is pornography a bad thing? How should we judge it, and how best can we apply those judgments?

Also complicating the issue is the fact that there are grades of pornography; in that category we can lump everything from artistic, museum-worthy photography to kiddie porn. I used to be an avid reader of Playboy, and in fact the articles are interesting and informative, while the photos are quite tame by today’s standards. I understand Penthouse is a bit rougher, but neither one approaches a lot of the stuff anyone on the planet can find on the internet any day of the week. But for the sake of argument, let’s focus on the relatively “normal” raciness of the magazines in question and their ilk.

How you react to this issue concerning the military is obviously going to depend on your opinion of these particular magazines and “pornography” in general. There’s certainly room in the world for different points of view, but this is a case of one group of people deciding for another what choices they may have. Were these soldiers home, the freedom we all enjoy in the U.S. would permit them to decide whether or not to look at these publications. That suggests we should, as much as is in our power, extend those same benefits to them when abroad fighting for that freedom.

But some people consider reading prurient magazines as a shameful activity that ought not to be encouraged among men assigned to honorably represent our country. It’s difficult to argue with them on that point, because they themselves feel shame about the enjoyment of porn. They do not think it a normal or healthy expression of sexuality, so naturally the idea of soldiers “contemplating” the centerfold makes them cringe.

Personally, I came to terms as a young woman with the male propensity to enjoy looking at naked women. It’s so pervasive and commonplace that I don’t need a sociologist to tell me it’s hardwired in males. And truly, I’d rather have men express their love for female variety this way than by indulging in rampant promiscuity. And when they are currently deprived of the option of conjugal relations, it’s hard to expect regular guys to become monks in every way. I personally side with the “let’s do all we can for these guys” camp.

But like I said above, when people are ashamed of a behavior themselves, it’s hard to convince them of the harmlessness of it in others. I’ve run into this a few times before in a completely different context. Sometimes when a woman discovers her partner has been indulging in online porn, she can really freak out. Because most women (not all by any means) aren’t especially turned on by this stuff, they simply can’t relate to what their men are doing. Many women in this situation panic, wondering if their mates are perverts, or if marriage been so totally unsatisfying, or both. A female can react to this situation as violently as if she had caught her husband in bed with a flesh-and-blood woman.

I really feel bad when this happens. Because in the vast majority of cases, the guy is just being a guy. He loves his girlfriend/wife, he would never cheat on her, he’s not any kind of a perv, and his perusings probably simply serve to spice up his monogamous sex life. But here we have a woman feeling undesirable and betrayed, and a man feeling either guilty or terribly misunderstood...and it really doesn’t need to be that way.

It’s then that I really want to step into an area that I would normally not consider my business: someone else’s sex life. Because I hate to see people drawing harmfully incorrect conclusions that will only bring misery to themselves and others. I want to reassure these women that it’s okay, they did not marry monsters, their mates still love them. I want to teach them that male sexuality, while different from their own, is not something to fear or loathe. No normal, healthy male, even if he occasionally downloads a movie or saves a naked photo to his hard drive, is trying to say by this that he doesn’t want to be with and love a real woman. (Although he’d better have virus protection on his computer, or the household will be adversely affected!)

And I do wish a similar attitude could be adopted by those passing judgment on soldiers who want to read Playboy and Penthouse. They’re not cheating on America, people, they’re just being guys. If we appreciate their maleness when it’s applied to using force to protect us, it’s not fair to begrudge them that same maleness in other contexts, now is it?

The Intimacy Factor

After making love with my husband the other night (and if my dad or my girls are reading this, it’s okay, everyone…no details will follow!), an interesting thought crossed my mind. There’s a factor involved when you are sexually engaged with another person that sometimes gets lost in the fireworks.

Everyone recognizes that sex is significant to a relationship because it is physically intense. That special person who is there when you reach the pinnacle of pleasure is bound to mean a lot to you, if only in that moment, no matter how much you try to treat the act as “casual.” But there’s something else that goes on that may create even more of an attachment.

Ever think about why it is that we are naturally shy about sex? Even if a person is raised without any religious guilt or other hindrances, he or she will tend to keep his or her erotic activities on the D.L. I think it’s because passion makes us a little crazy, and certainly different in our behavior than in any other circumstance, and we’re just not comfortable showing that side of ourselves. In order to be willing to let another person see us like that, we need certain assurances, like privacy and trust. [Well, unless we are drunk or simply too turned on to resist, that is. But if intoxication or extreme horniness came into play, the result is typically that “walk of shame” the next morning.]

My point is, we don’t give away our sexual selves easily without paying a price. The happier, more comfortable manner of doing it is in the context of a strong relationship, one where we have become at ease and secure with our partner. If you are intimate in other things, like knowing each other’s personal history, sharing times of illness or extreme emotion, creating a home, etc., you will likewise be intimate in bed. It’s hard to worry about what your mate with think of the sex noises you make when he’s seen you with the stomach flu!

People complain a lot about “losing the magic” as a relationship ages, and that’s a topic I could discuss for pages. But there’s one aspect of a mature relationship that is a real benefit: the accumulated intimacy. Being at ease in bed is a real boon, especially when you are too tired or stressed to worry about being really sexy or performing at your peak. When you’re not at your best, love and intimacy can take up a lot of slack.

The flip side of this is that when you choose to have sex with someone, that person is going to uncover a very private part of you, and vice versa. If that one piece of intimacy is out of balance with the rest of your relationship with him or her, some strange repercussions will develop in spite of both your intentions to be casual and not have the encounter mean anything. Perhaps it isn’t a big deal in the context of the rest of your life (although it’s sad when that’s true of sex!), but it will mean something, assuredly.

The Intimacy Factor does matter, whether in a stable relationship decades long or a one night stand. Those who are wise at love are mindful of that!

Nothing’s Sexier than a Guy Who Wants You

Warning, 4/17/08 “The Office” spoilers to follow!

First a bit of back story: A couple weeks ago my daughter broke up with her boyfriend of two and a half years. It was their second break-up: the other time was a year ago when her boyfriend called it off. It only took him like two weeks to beg her to take him back, to give him another chance, which eventually she did. He made a lot of promises, everything from quitting smoking eventually to marrying her eventually. Well, a year went by of her waiting for that ring, hoping he would change his various ways, and while at first it look promising, time told another story. Finally, when pressed, he admitted he didn’t really want to get married at all.

The “fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me” rule went into play, and now my daughter is single again, and surprisingly happy. There are worse things than being single, and one of them is being with a guy who doesn’t truly want you—at least not enough to compromise his other wants.

So, this past Thursday night my husband and I were watching “The Office,” and our favorite TV couple, Jim and Pam, were up to their usual charming hijinx all episode. Finally Jim mentioned, humorously, that he intended to propose to Pam—not right then, but eventually. This was the same line that had been used on my daughter, but somehow coming from Jim, we knew he meant it down to the soles of his feet. Or so we hoped, anyway.

Next scene, Jim is talking to the “fourth wall,” the cameraman, and tells him he really means it. He whips out a small black box, flips it open, and there’s the ring! He says he bought it a week after they started dating and is just waiting for the perfect moment.

Wow. If you’re wondering what my daughter thought of this, she hasn’t yet seen the episode as of this writing. But David and I couldn’t help sighing and wishing it had been Jim who was our hoped-to-be son-in-law.

My daughters’ generation abounds in commitment-phobes, much to the dismay of both my girls (the other one is just looking for a nice guy to go out with once or twice and they even balk at that). Too many of these young men simply don’t want to grow up and be responsible for a wife, a home, and possibly even children. They need their time for playing computer games, hanging out in bars, or watching sports. They need their money for iPhones, trips to Europe, and lots of beer. One figures they will eventually develop different priorities and start to see the value of nurturing a relationship with a long-term companion, building a home, and setting goals for significant personal achievements.

There’s that word again: eventually. Meaning not now, maybe later, maybe.

These same guys don’t have a clue what being a real man means. Masculine virtue—the kind that makes a male attractive to the opposite sex and admirable to his own—lies on the other end of the scale from “eventually.” It encompasses qualities like determination, responsibility, reliability, devotion, maturity and discernment. The virtuous male also recognizes the value in a good woman, a woman who has the qualities to make a happy and secure home with him, and wants her in a proactive way. Not just in a “hey, it’s cool, we’ll just hang out” way, but in a “let’s take the steps to make a real future together” way.

Which brings us back to Jim. He knows Pam well enough to have figured out the two of them can be happy together. His conclusion: Why not get married? Why not promise to spend the rest of their lives together? In fact, his excitement at the idea is obvious and infectious. Who can help but envy Pam, that a good man like this wants her so bad?

Jim Halpert has been pretty damn sexy for the duration of this show’s four seasons. But I think he reached new heights Thursday night.

Three Turn-On Moments

Don't you just love those random "Turn-On Moments" that sometimes grace your day? Over the past week or so, I've enjoyed three of these, and I just wanted to share them with you.

The Transformation

I highly recommend the 2007 fantasy movie "Stardust." I had seen the trailer for it and while I was not particularly impressed by the actor who seemed to be the male lead, there was some other really hot guy in the movie that I was on the lookout for. So we rented it from Netflix.

Charlie Cox plays Tristan, an ordinary young fellow whose life takes a turn for the adventurous when he finds a woman (Claire Danes) who is apparently the embodiment of a fallen star. He's a sweet, slightly bumbling guy, kinda cute. Eventually the two hook up with Robert DeNiro's character, Capt. Shakespeare, a fierce and swashbuckling airship pirate who is secretly a gay cross-dresser. Yes, I'm not making that up.

The good captain takes it upon himself to give the two young people makeovers. Not only does Tristan get a very sexy new suit of clothes and fencing lessons, Capt. Shakespeare does his hair. And, this being fantasy, Tristan's hair gets longer. The long and short of it--sorry--is that Charlie Cox IS the hot guy I saw in the trailer, post-makeover. So, all along I'd been watching the very fellow I lusted for in the trailer, without knowing it.

That made him all the more attractive. I guess it's the classic frog-into-prince phenomenon. Not that the pre-makeover Charlie was a frog, exactly...he wasn't bad, don't get me wrong. But the coat, the sword, the hair...well, he really turned into something special. It took my breath away seeing that surprise transformation. And that's a turn-on moment.

Expertise Under Pressure

Many a time I've talked about how nothing's so sexy as talent or expertise. That, of course, is the secret to the sex appeal of 80's TV hero MacGyver, famous for his ingenious ability to devise whatever he needs out of regular stuff he finds laying around.

In a recent episode of "Mythbusters," Jamie Hynemann, Adam Savage, and their Build Team set about to test some of MacGyver's stunts in real life. The concluding segment of the show featured Grant and Tory posing as ultravillains and putting Jamie and Adam into challenging circumstances, to see if they could be as clever as MacGyver.

Our heroes were locked in a small room illuminated by two hanging light bulbs, with nothing else at hand. Would they figure out, as MacGyver did, that you can use a light bulb filament to pick a lock? Well, it took the boys no time at all think of that, and soon they were using Adam's steel-toed boot as a hammer to flatten the filament into a lock pick.

That was amazing enough, but there was still the challenge of picking the lock. Lock-picking is nothing in movies, but who do you know in real life who knows how to pick a real lock in a real doorknob? But wouldn't you know, Adam has some locksmithing in his background. He and Jamie took turns with their makeshift pick as the clock ran down. Adam announced he could feel the tumblers, and after another moment's careful concentration and minute motions, he unlocked the door!



Maybe you had to be there. Okay, maybe you had to be ME and be there. But I was blown away by the fact that Adam pulled off a stunt you normally only see people do on TV and in the movies. You could tell he was a bit amazed himself. I mean wow. I turned to David and said, "If Adam Savage were here right now he could totally do me on the spot." And I meant it too.

That was a big turn-on moment. Seriously, Adam. Sigh.

Erotic Flashback

Over the weekend I was organizing a bunch of old photos and happened to look at the album from when Davie and I were first dating, circa 1992. Backstory: I was recently separated from my gay husband, and hadn't seen any romance in a good decade and more. Imagine my excitement at the prospect of dating. I did marketing/PR at a law firm where Davie was employed in the mailroom. He'd drop off the mail and I'd admire his boyish good looks and cool and quirky fashion sense (like a drink of water in the desert, seeing as this was a law firm).

Davie's a runner and at this time was in his prime, and to put it bluntly, had the best ass in southeastern Wisconsin. Very possibly he still does. I found an old picture I'd forgotten about, of Davie wearing his favorite pants, with the 29" waist and the skin-tight posterior, and a really nice cotton oxford shirt with the cuffs folded up. From behind. It suddenly came back to me how I used to watch him go by when he dropped off my mail. And the time I rode the elevator with him and was all entranced by his brown leather jacket and longish hair and earring.

When you live with someone day in and out, through cleaning up after your cats and having gall bladder surgery and watching countless episodes of "House Hunters," you just get used to him. It's nice now and then to recall so vividly why you were attracted to him when you were practically strangers.

That's a turn-on moment that pays off most of all. :-)

Twins in Love

There has been much talk in the news lately about a pair of twins from the UK who were separated at birth, knew nothing of their siblinghood, met as adults and fell in love. The two married, and subsequently learned of the relationship. Their marriage was annulled and according to reports, they split up.

About a year ago, there was a similar story in the press about a German couple. The brother went into foster care at a very young age, and didn’t see his younger sister until both were adults. They fell in love and have actually had four children together. The brother has served two years in prison for incest and may have to serve more. Three of the children were taken from their home and put in foster care.

Few would disagree that these two stories are tragic. The point of debate is, is sibling incest immoral and should it be illegal?

The taboo against incest is almost universally prevalent in human society, with the most notable exception being ancient Egypt, were brother/sister marriages were quite common for three centuries. Scientific studies show that sexual repulsion stems not from the idea of similar heredity (“ick, we’re the same flesh and blood”) but from the “familiarity breeds contempt” principle. For example, unrelated children raised in the close proximity of an Israeli kibbutz had no sexual interest in each other when they matured. Anyone raised with a sibling (or even those like me, without one) can understand that; it makes no difference if that sibling was adopted and was no relation.

This would suggest, take out the familiarity, and anyone is fair game, sibling or no.

The two cases I mentioned above are interesting in their differences. The twins, who fell in love oblivious to their connection, apparently did so due to the uncanny similarities they experienced. I wish I could speak more to the question of their reaction to the news, but they have remained anonymous so far. Still, the fact that they split up after learning the truth, would indicate they were “heebed out” by being genetically related.

On the other hand, the German siblings knew of their relationship when they met. They attribute their bond to a desire to want to heal the separation caused by the brother being taken from his original family. In their case, the knowledge that they were brother and sister did not hinder them and may have actually encouraged their attraction.

This just goes to show that different people react differently when it comes to being capable of sustaining sexual attraction to a known sibling...although I suspect the UK twins were probably just as much in love as ever, but those feelings were at odds with their intellectual moral principles.

Speaking for myself, it’s interesting how I feel on the issue. Occasionally I’ve seen movies (“Gladiator”) or read books (The Hotel New Hampshire) about brother/sister incest, but they were always about characters who had grown up together. In those cases, I reacted with the typical “oh, that’s icky” response. Then there’s the example of Children of Dune’s Leto and Ghanima Atreides, who are so close and so godlike, the subliminally sexual bond between them is a little disturbing but also strangely fitting.

And on the other end of the spectrum, I reacted to the UK twins case with a wish that they would stay together. Clearly at least for me, the taboo is not flesh, it’s proximity. Seeing as these two never knew each other as children, I feel there is no reason why they shouldn’t stay together. My initial reaction was that ideally the law would allow them to stay together but not procreate, but the German case made me reconsider that aspect as well.

I believe three of the German couple’s four children are slightly disabled, as geneticists would predict. Many say 50% of offspring of siblings will have physical or mental defects. But really, from a moral standpoint, does the law have the right to dictate to any consenting adults if they may have children? After all, wouldn’t we all object if someone wanted to pass a law forbidding people carrying genes for Down syndrome, hemophilia, or sickle-cell anemia from having kids?

It seems to me the natural taboo most humans feel against sexual feelings towards proximate people is sufficient to safeguard the race from too much interbreeding. The occasional exception is not going to be our genetic undoing. That said, I have to amend this statement with the caveat that I’m not a fan of closed interbreeding societies like Warren Jeffs’ FLDS, where the majority of members of the community are genetically related--that’s just too darn much proximity, people!

About twenty years ago I wrote my second novel, a romance called A Bondage of Dreams, which was never published. In the story a woman falls in love with her young music professor, a man still tortured by the unsolved kidnapping of his beloved sister that occurred when they were small children. The heroine senses the prof feels likewise, and is puzzled why he keeps her at arm’s length. It finally comes out that he has looked into her past and is convinced she is the long-lost sister, hence he cannot allow himself to have sexual feelings for her. The woman does some research of her own and fears he may be right, but finally uncovers information that proves they are not related, and the HEA ending ensues.

Remembering the feelings these two had for each other in my book, I think of cases like the UK and German couples. Really, of what relevance is heredity?

It’s a taboo that isn’t always easy to apply, and a moral conundrum. All I know is, no one should be put in prison for sexually loving another consenting adult; exactly how that benefits society I can’t imagine.

Why don’t I feel romantic toward my husband?

I remember when I was a young newlywed of 21, and found myself attracted to a co-worker. Up till then I thought that when you really loved someone, you only had eyes for him. Wasn’t that how it was in the love songs, movies, and books? Stricken, I confessed to my husband. He just smiled and assured me I was perfectly normal, probably mostly because he’d had the same experience for a lot longer.

Thirty years later, I have a lot clearer understanding of romantic, sexual love. Without doubt it is among the most exciting, inspiring, life-enhancing human experiences...but the part it plays in long-term relationships is much smaller than our culture would have us think. There are times I feel romantically/sexually towards my husband, but more often I feel different emotions that are not particularly romantic or erotic: comfortable, appreciative, secure, content, etc.

In fact, many of the emotions that spring from a healthy longstanding relationship are anathema to romance. In essence, romantic love is fascination with a being who seems both a perfect mate and somehow out of reach. That’s why all love stories tell the tale of the boy getting the girl (or vice versa), and end when he does. That’s why love songs are about yearning, pining, longing, missing, losing, and so on.

From a Jungian viewpoint (aka the one I have, LOL), this fact is easily explained. Romantic love is an animus phenomenon. What I mean by that is, it is always tied in to our conscious psyche yearning for its subconscious opposite self. Before I say something else unintelligible, let me illustrate. My own animus, my subconscious “dream lover,” is completely and uniquely mine (the perfect mate) and yet, being subconscious, is not accessible to me at will. Rather, he projects himself upon whatever person I’m infatuated with, attracted to, etc. Hence he seems elusive, out of reach. And there you have it, the formula: the perfect mate, who is somehow out of reach.

A husband, of course, is not out of reach, or at least not in a healthy marriage. Experience has proven him also not the perfect mate. Who is? Therefore, it’s very difficult to sustain feelings of romantic love, at least the classic “love song” type. You can love your husband, even adore him, you can most certainly be attracted to him and associate all sorts of pleasures with him, but those achy feelings of longing we think of as romantic love? Not so much.

Meanwhile, it is highly likely any given woman will periodically encounter male figures--be they “real people” or celebrities or characters in books, on TV, or in the movies--that provoke romantic feelings. These “animus bearers,” as Jung termed them, just happen to have the traits for which your particular soul yearns. In some women these animus feelings will be relatively mild, perhaps just a lively interest. In others, the emotions can be so powerful as to be confusing, unsettling...even make a woman question if she’s flipping out.

And most certainly make her feel guilty about having more passion for some actor than for her husband.

Such a woman is making two errors: One, she is underestimating the significance of her bond to her husband. The healthy marriage bond is based on a lot more significant things than intense emotion. Two, she is confusing her very real attachment to her animus (that subconscious part of herself) with feelings for an external person she probably doesn’t even know well. I don’t mean that to sound accusatory, we’ve all done it! And in fact, it’s so FUN to do it, I’d actually advise you to indulge, as long as you keep everything in perspective.

This all translates to the following simple answer to the question posed in our subject line:

You can think half the day about Matt Damon / Hugh Jackman / Christian Bale, or whomever, and still have a perfectly normal and healthy love for your husband. In fact, look for romance in your fantasies, and love in your relationships, and you will do pretty well.

Bridezillas and Self-Love

The other day Davie and I watched the TLC show "Say Yes to the Dress." It focused on one very high end bridal store and the "consultants" who work there, trying to match brides with their perfect gowns. Needless to say, it confirmed our idea--shared by many--that weddings these days have truly gotten out of control.

As I watched middle class families pick out $9,100 designer dresses for one day's use, I struggled to figure out how all this fit with the big picture of a woman's wedding day. True love...romance...a celebration of lifelong intimacy...sure, the elements are there for one mighty important day. But the brides on this show exhibited a true sense of desperation, even panic, when it came to choosing the right dress. Why should one little ingredient in the day be so crucial, I asked myself?

Then it hit me. For a lot of women, the thing that sets their wedding day apart from every other day in their lives is that silent, understood contract between the bride and all who attend the celebration: for this day, she is the loveliest, most important person there. For this day, she is a princess, she shines brighter than anyone else, and regardless of how plain or unattractive she feels every other day, at her wedding a woman is beautiful.

And seeing as there will be no other day she can be guaranteed of that, the poor bride is terrified something will go wrong to spoil her only chance at unrivalled beauty. There can be no screw-ups to distract or put off the guests. The party has to be at least as big and fancy and flawless as any other wedding the guests have attended. And above all, the dress has to make the bride look her best.

If she chooses one that doesn't flatter her figure perfectly, or is slightly the wrong white for her complexion, or is too plain, or too gaudy, or too commonplace, well...it could spoil everything. And she has one day, that ONE DAY, to get it right. Every other day of her life, no one may even be paying attention to her, much less entertaining the idea that she is beautiful.

What awful pressure to put on yourself! I can tell you right now, my dress and my hair the day of my wedding to David were not at all the best I ever looked...probably not even in the top ten. I'm putting in this post a photo of my in my favorite dress ever...I bought it for an office Christmas party and I just got lucky. Life can not be planned with quite that much accuracy. We had a lot more fun planning our wedding to be a day that expressed who the two of us are, particularly as a couple, and we shared in all the preparations and had a blast.

Alas, it is far more common nowadays that the groom lays low for the year of planning, hoping at best to placate his future wife and mother-in-law, and to avoid as much as possible the stress afflicting them. Instead of the planning process bringing the couple together, it separates them. And frankly, I don't see how that does anything to make the bride feel more desirable to her husband.

But she will feel, of course, that if she has the right dress, the right hairstyle, the right flowers, he will greet her with joy and adoration at the altar. And I admit most grooms do just that, fortunately. But the sad part is that the bride feels she can never again be the princess, the most beautiful and admirable person in the room.

Truth is, when women focus not quite so much on appearances, and rather work to discover their individual charms and gifts, they can feel beautiful even on some random Tuesday in February. If they expend the effort it takes to plan a wedding instead on nurturing intimacy and shared fun with their partner, that too will bring a more permanent feeling of desirability.

What turns perfectly nice women into Bridezillas is that desperate need to feel beautiful, sexy, and loved. No dress can do that: only we can, by recognizing our great qualities and accepting ourselves as lovable and lovely creatures.

Google Takes the Place of Dear Abby

“what does a man really mean when he says your a wonderful person attractive, cute, funny, sexy and real but I don't want to fall in love with anyone right now”

The other day my tracking indicated that someone found this blog by searching on that. Yeah, that entire phrase. My first thought was, “Wow, now that’s some aggressive use of Google.” Immediately after that, I thought, “This poor person! If only she’d actually found an answer to her question!” And my third thought was, “I’m surprised she clicked on the particular result that led to my blog, whatever crazy entry it might have been.”

The particular result was the archive page for March 2006, which just happened to include several of those 31 words. However, in March 2006 I said nothing helpful to this woman, unless she also wanted to know about my personal list of favorite aliens--not likely. And I can’t help but feel sorry that my archive page didn’t offer her some guidance, sympathy or comfort.

31 words, 30 of them different, one of them misspelled...if only it were enough to have some clue how to reply?

My first inclination would be to take the guy at face value, even if it’s hard to believe. Sure, personally, when I meet someone I find wonderful, attractive, cute, funny, sexy and real, I’m all ready to go! (Or I would be if I weren’t already married to someone like that.) But my point is, many of us females think that little list is more than enough to motivate a person to fall in love. How can this guy resist? Well, he’s a guy--and maybe he really doesn’t want to fall in love with anyone right now. Maybe he’s very focused on some other aspect of life: dealing with issues in his job/career, figuring out who he is and what he really wants, saving money to travel, even getting over another relationship. A woman often finds it pretty easy to set aside other priorities when a good guy comes along, but a man doesn’t necessarily put love at the top of his list.

A second possibility is that our hero isn’t being so entirely truthful. He may recognize all these good qualities in you but there are a few things about you that he knows he can’t get past. Nevertheless, he doesn’t blame you for them or feel comfortable listing them to you. Maybe he’s Baptist and you’re Catholic and he doesn’t want to explain why that matters to him. Maybe he likes Amazon women and just can’t personally get turned on by a petite waif like you; what’s he going to say, “You’re too skinny for me”? He’s thinks you’re a really fine person and wants desperately to avoid being negative.

It’s a possibility...but not the best translation of the 31 words. That’s because most decent guys won’t even bring in the words “fall in love” unless they have really good reason to.

But there are the not-so-decent guys who don’t mind toying with a girl’s feelings. The 31 words could possibly translate to “I think you’re hot but want you to know right up front that I don’t want a commitment.” He could figure if he’s made such a statement to you, it counts as full disclosure so you can’t come back later and say, “but you led me on!” If he says this, and continues to flirt with you, beware of actually agreeing to sleeping with him, unless he’s amended his statement.

So how to tell which translation is closest to correct? Well, I guess you have to know the guy to judge that. If he seems upstanding and trustworthy, take his words at face value. If he might be a player and continues some sort of flirtation, get clarification before you make any important choices.

Of course the heart-breaking part of this little scenario is that our 31-Words Woman has reason to believe this guy she likes has this wonderful, high opinion of her. What can a girl do when someone says something so sweet? It just fans the flames of hope, regardless of the crushing phrase that follows. Sadly though, it’s that second clause that a person has to focus upon. If the guy was truly motivated to pursue a relationship with you, if he were the kind of guy who wanted to put you first, in other words, if he were a guy worth being with, he wouldn’t say it. No man seeking love, even considering the possibility of love, is going to tell you “I don’t want to fall in love right now.”

And if that’s what you hope for from him, sadly, he just told you quite plainly not to hope for it.

This “lovelorn column” business can be pretty sad! Well, Dear Abby I’m not...I’m just a romance author wishing she’d had a better response for a confused woman than “I had a crush once on My Favorite Martian.”