Thursday, May 03, 2012

Why I didn't respond to your personal ad...

Dear person who isn't actually reading anything from me, as I didn't respond to your online personal:
You may be asking yourself why, in fact, your personal failed to garner a response from me. After all, you may be thinking, aren't you witty (as those Douglas Adams and Monty Python quotes scattered liberally throughout your profile suggest)? Did I somehow miss the photograph of you in a bikini, offering your raw sexiness to the world? Did I overlook your...unorthodox prose stylings? No, no, I noticed all of that--some of it to my own everlasting regret.
So, you might be asking--in fact, based on your profile, I'm almost certain you're asking-- WASSUP? Well, here is what is colloquially known as 'sup:

1. Your wholesale slaughter of the beautiful triumvirate to which (medicine aside) I have dedicated my life: grammar, spelling and punctuation. Of course, there are variations on this theme. Maybe you never learned the conventions of standard English--little things like properly using homonyms, or what commas and periods are for, or...spelling. I'm talking to you, Ms. "Most people discribe me as pretty easygoing, I like to fish and ride my motorcycle, maeby on our first date you could ride on the back of my hog and we could get some beer's, its pretty empressive I love it and hopfully youll love it too." Holy run-on sentence, Batman-- someone get this woman some periods and teach her how to use them. Never mind 'hopfully'--in reference to our beers, I suppose? Which leads us to the question: the beer's WHAT? What belongs to the beer? Note: I am not so cruel as to actually take a post from someone's profile verbatim and plaster it here for edification/bitching/mocking purposes. That would make me an ass. What's mentioned here is a composite of many posts and many people.

2. Your profile picture, which is a face shot because it has to be but mostly a picture of your body-glittered, heavily-tanned, halter-top-clad DDD breasts--and overall profile, for that matter--lead me to believe you may be, ah, a 'working girl.' Now, I have no problem with sex workers. I have friends who work/have worked in the sex industry. One of my all-time favorite saints, the kick-ass first apostle Mary of Magdala, is the patron saint of prostitutes (even though she WASN'T ONE--which is a topic for an entirely different blog post). This isn't about slut-shaming or the Madonna/whore dichotomy or sex-negative culture. This is about the fact that I'm looking for a long term relationship, and something about your profile--maybe the "I love to give full body massages :)"--is sending me a "professional" vibe. And I don't want to show up for our first date and be expected to pay for any more than coffee. If you know what I mean.

3. You sent me a message inquiring about a date, and you are not a woman. In one case, a gentleman asked me if I "only like girls--you look pretty and sound like you'd be fun to hang out with." Thank you for the compliments, sir; the photos I put up were heavily doctored (just kidding...maybe), but I am INCREDIBLY fun to hang out with. If this weren't a dating site, I'd say we should hang out. However, your question about 'only liking girls'--and the fact that one of your profile pictures appears to be of a bulge in your boxers (what, did you have your teacup poodle hiding in there?)--leads me to believe that you're hoping this hanging out might occur in bed, naked. Which leads me to my main point: I put my listing up in 'Women looking for women' for a reason. I am what, complex sociological and anthropological questions aside, is commonly called a 'woman': that's how I identify. Another way I identify is as a lesbian, which means I like to hang out with, talk to, develop romantic/emotional relationships with, and, yes, have mind-blowingly passionate sex with other women. Not dudes with teacup poodles in their pants.

No comments: