Tuesday, March 11, 2008

blog writer blog, i mean block

Natali: we all are
blog writer blog
block
is what i meant to say
me: i like the first better
in fact, i no longer even believe it
what about you, what are your dating blog ideas
Natali: i have nothing
me: but we're supposed to be brainstorming
12:40 PM i think you want the dating blog to fail
Natali: i know i am trying
what!
haha
i really dont have any ideas
i wish i did
12:41 PM in fact i hate everything i have written on it
for the last three months
jefe and brooke might write about how they got engaged
which i thought was fun
12:42 PM me: i have an idea
what about if i posted parts of this chat
including the last line
12:43 PM (and possibly the last one, but this one seems like a stretch)
so the post is about how we have no interesting thoughts on dating
Natali: oh thats a good idea
me: we're onto post-dating
Natali: my friend just sent me this article

10 minutes
12:54 PM Natali: i just finished it. it was hella long
12:58 PM me: i'm not even half way through
i keep getting distracted by work
Natali: i was about to say i am such a faster reader
but you had that handy "work" excuse
me: i'm sure you're a fast work
1:00 PM reader
1:02 PM fast reader
Natali: fast work...is that sexual
me: it could be
1:04 PM Natali: my apartment is a mess and i dont like it one bit
1:07 PM me: i finished it
but i'm going to go to lunch
maybe we should respond to the essay as dating posts

14 comments:

natali said...

maybe i subconsciously was encouraging everyone to blog.

brian said...

should we talk about our responses to the article here?

so i think it's over-generalized and i'm unsure where she's placing the blame. on men? or is she placing blame? i think so, since she's stating that the contemporary man-child is primarily selfish and immature. that may be true, but how much can you blame them for it? it seems like it's advantageous to marketers and advertisers and so on to have a defined and identifiable type of consumer who has disposable income and few responsibilities. but she also makes some interesting points.

natali said...

i thought that the most interesting point she made was that women who are evolving into a world in which they can achieve their educational and career goals while raising a family find that men have evolved into a world where family is not a requirement and have less interest. so its not hard to have a family because you are working so much. its just harder to find someone who wants to have children with you.

which is probably why becky and i talk about adopting babies together. as a straight (non) couple. its going to be hard to explain...

becky said...

i didn't even realize there was an article linked to your post until now. and then i read it. it was pretty good, although i don't agree with all of it. i need to think about this some more.

natali said...

i guess i dont really blame men for wanting to stay in the adolescent phase as long as possible. it is probably infinitely more fun than having a mortgage (almost always a mistake). if i didnt have biology breathing down my neck i would probably be doing the same thing.

becky said...

it's interesting to think about the cause and affect of everything. are women single longer because men are stuck in this phase and won't commit/grow up? or are women single longer because they can be as well? it's much more socially acceptable now for women to be single, 30 and career-minded. did men's disinterest in committing at a younger age contribute to women focusing on careers instead of relationships? or did this give the men the freedom to not have to think about committing? is there a correlation? are they independant of each other? i don't know if the author is placing blame, but it kind of feels like she is.

brian said...

i guess my problem with the article is that it seems to equates marriage and family with adulthood. while that may be true (depending on how you define each of those words), why is it important to even be an adult? also, it seemed like the article was pretty nostalgic for nuclear families. that's in the past.

natali said...

i wish someone would have told me nuclear families were going out of style while i was busying squandering my child bearing years.

becky said...

i agree brian. i hate the idea that being married and having kids makes someone more of an adult than me. it's just not true. i'm not sure what makes an adult.

natali said...

oh that reminds me of the blog i was going to post about being an adult.

chelsea said...

i'm willing to bet money that ms. kay hymowitz isn't married. that's one bitter article

natali said...

well she can only blame herself. and society. mostly society.

becky said...

i didn't think the article sounded bitter. i think there is a lot of truth in it. i don't even think that it's bashing men. i just think it's saying men aren't committing or marrying because there isn't much societal pressure to. also, there's no biological clock ticking. i don't think the article mentioned that, though.

brian said...

i agree with becky. she (the author [and becky too]) makes a lot of valid points. i just don't know if i agree with her where she places responsibility for the new-men. actually, maybe i do agree with her. she spends a bit of time talking about how this demographic (25-40 single men) are exactly the demographic advertisers are looking for. so there are all these marketing strategies aimed at celebrating this kind of responsibility-free lifestyle where you can spend all your time buying things. and buying things conveniently becomes the only status marker for this group. it's a vicious cycle.