I Love You, Let's Meet

more fun from Canada; very entertaining comments sections, esp. the genius Onion link.

At least the Canadians don’t have to barter sex for health insurance.

I was on the since-cancelled Dr. Keith Ablow show a few months back, for about 30 seconds. My mom watched and a friend taped it, but I had the sense that otherwise it made not a ripple in the universe, so nice to hear these bloggers saw it and even mentioned me, rather than the onstage experts who got more time and seemed more positive (they both found their husbands online) and results-oriented.

this is the second article about a dating site I’ve seen in the last few days to mention colostomy bags.

This seems a very humane and sensible site — if perhaps a bit too general.

Radar mag, which I’ve heard of but never read, found some sites I’d never heard of. Funniest bit is the -ostomy site people contemplating inviting Fidel Castro to join. I think he’s got enough problems.

This is kind of a lot of mermaid parade pix, but they’re good. It was really really fun, if you live in or near New York, you should be in it next year. (Your blogmistress is in there, rather unsexily chewing gum, which you really had to or else you’d drink too much water and have nowhere to pee).

So many great costumes, but my fave may be the Cruella deVille mermaid with the dalmation-head bra.

I’m torn. I certainly don’t love litigiousness in general (though it’s fun to say). If any two sites have to get sued, however, e-harmony and true.com would be my top choices.

I love this idea and this use of the technology.

This article particularly resonates now, as the American author-moms attack each other with bizarre ferocity. The stay-at-homers and the working mothers blame each other for all the world’s ills when clearly their real beef is with full-time work itself. It IS too much on top of parenting. I love this idea so much I don’t think the mothers should get it all to themselves; why can’t working Dads get in on job-sharing? Why can’t childless people who rather sensibly don’t want to work 40, 50, 60 hours a week get in on it?

Sweet interview, even after I bit nerve’s hand for not giving me my man-treat.

You can really hear the three cups of coffee talking.

I love the juxtaposition of the site’s name with the fact that women don’t pay. As objects of desire, hot babes shouldn’t have to spend money to hook up. Men should do the paying. And in exchange? YouCanGetMe! Ostensibly since women had to buy “shoes and a bag” for the date, but the whole thing comes off like the ads in the back of the Village Voice for busty Asian she-males, outcalls only. Chix for sale. Except it’s real women on the site, so odds are YouCan’tGetMe, so it’s more like fantasy fodder.
Women get their own fantasy choices, too, because this is the 21st century after all. What’s odd is how all my friends I sent this to and I put Brian in the bathroom in the gladiator outfit. What does that mean? (To be fair and balanced, I then put Jason in the kitchen dressed like a cowboy, which was cool until he started rubbing the sponge he’d been scrubbing the counters with all over his chest! Yuck!)

this hilarious press release does make you ponder that one, accidental marriage, doesn’t it?

I’ve linked to some stories about the sites for hot women and rich men, with their Social Darwinism for Dummies commentary. What intrigued me in this article is the attempt mentioned at the end, to flip the script and set up a singles event for rich women and cute guys under 29. Here’s more about the sugar daddy/mama date nights. Men only had to be worth 200-400 grand, but women have to have millions!

It’s so depressing when women try to sink toward equality. You know, just because men enjoy something — smoking cigars, setting cars on fire when their team wins, treating human beings as status objects — doesn’t make it enviable.

Anybody out there got five million bucks I could borrow til this event is over? I would LOVE to be a black widow on the wall observing this bizarre hunt.