Two dudes review “Sex and the City 2″ and the anti-SATC apologist stance
I haven't seen Sex and the City 2. But this is a hilarious review of it by two straight dudes, from The Awl. Here's an excerpt:
Neel: I felt really sad to be American, or at least Indian-American, during this movie.
David: AGREE.
Neel: Did it make you uncomfortable?
David: It was weird that in a situation where you control everything that's happening, you would make your characters seem like such obnoxious Americans.
David: The kind that you see abroad, that make you be all like, "Ughhhhhh."
Neel: Basically watching these poor Arab dudes with waxed torsos parade around in service of these spoiled American hags?
OK, the use of "hags" is a bit over the top. But for me, this gets at the real ickiness of the SATC2 plot. I'm tired of reading all the SATC2 apologists saying male movie reviewers just don't get it, they don't like it because it's a female-led movie, and they just can't get through a single review without mentioning menopause. Doy--Samantha is going through menopause in the movie. So male reviewers aren't allowed to mention it? Are we going back to the 1950s where only women can talk about lady problems like that? WTH?
It's not the movie reviewers, people. It's (probably) the movie.
Here's my real beef: if SATC2 is really as bad as the reviews and basic elements of the plot (Exhibit 1: culturally insensitive trip to Abu Dhabi) indicate, then Michael Patrick King should be ashamed of himself for so brazenly squandering the devotion of all the SATC fans in order to cash in on a second round of box office receipts. I mean, we have spent YEARS getting to know these characters. We have watched them on (pay) cable. We have paid to rent or buy the series DVDs. We paid to see the first movie. And now, he delivers the equivalent of Rocky V as the first sequel. In producingt a movie that seems to celebrate so many of the characters' worst qualities, he has done the loyal SATC fans a huge disservice. We deserve better. The highest compliment I've heard anyone give this movie is that seeing it, with a huge group of girlfriends, was fun, but the movie was only fine.
Also, I have to agree with David and Neel: Miranda is an unlikable character. She did have brief moments in the series where her selfishness didn't eclipse all other elements of her personality--specifically, in letting down her guard and letting Steve into her life. I think we all cheered for her at that.
Body language: lost in translation
Bob Sutton, a really great management author, posted this item on how people can read others' body language but not their own. I found it utterly fascinating--especially since I my lack of self-awareness about how I'm coming across really hurts me with this whole dating thing--and wanted to write more about it, but it's lingering in my drafts folder for too long. I'll let you all add to the discussion.
Maybe I should move…
SF Weekly recently ran an article on how difficult it is for ladies in SF to find guys to date (spoiler alert: not even the pickup artists they hired could help). Among the other details I already knew, there was this shocking bit of math:
As of 2008, San Francisco had a total population of 808,976, including 93,820 single men and 83,840 single women aged 20 to 40.
Based on the best estimates by the Department of Public Health, there are around 65,000 gay men and about 27,000 lesbians living in San Francisco. Assuming that many of them are single (remember Proposition 8?), we calculated that 36 percent of single men in this city are gay and 18 percent of single women are lesbians.
After factoring in that information, there are 60,045 single heterosexual men and 68,749 single heterosexual women in the age range we examined.
There are roughly 8,700 more single straight women in San Francisco than single straight dudes. No wonder it's so hard to find guys to date.
Also, ladies, I hear Alaska and Colorado have a lot of guys. Maybe about 8,800 of you should move there, because I don't want to have to quit my band. Just an idea.
Apologies to those of you who have commented
I'm supposed to get notified if you're a first-time commenter, so I can approve your comment. But for some reason, the notification isn't working. I'm looking into it.
For those of you who missed her comment in the delay, Naomi updated us on the awesome Craigslist sugar daddy dude. So great.
Virtual boyfriends
Lisa Katayama has an incredible gift for finding the absurd and writing about it in a really compelling way (usually combining a straight delivery with a genuine respect and curiosity), both on her blog and in her articles for Wired and other pubs (such as the one I work for in my day job).
She recently talked to the WSJ about virtual boyfriends, which are apparently becoming popular in Japan. The article says:
Sites like “Web Kare” (“Web Boyfriend,” at Web-Kare.jp) let users choose animated characters that live on their computers and cellphones; when prompted, they’ll tell you how great you look.
I love that "they'll tell you how great you look" is the one feature mentioned.
Here are two of Lisa's dating-related articles for Wired:
- Japan's pick-up school.
- Love hotels photo gallery. (We discussed this, in a very uninformed way, in the Bros Roundtable a few months ago.)
Ed. note: I wordsmithed this about four times after I originally posted it, but it's still not that well-written.
ABC News does their own Bros Roundtable
On their front door today, Yahoo had an item about 30-somethings and dating. Of course I had to watch it. They stole the Bros Roundtable idea! Check it out.
Dating book redux
The San Francisco Chronicle ran a funny little piece summarizing the dating advice from a few semi-recent books: The Rules, He's Just Not That Into You, and some other ones I had never heard of. It makes me wonder, though, if anyone ever found their mate by thinking of it as a "sale." That just seems so creepy. Maybe I should say "anyone in contemporary society."
The Chron also ran this cheery little item about loneliness being bad for your health. Maybe I can get Blue Cross to pay me for blogging by convincing them this whole 100 Emails 20 Dates thing is preventive care.
Diet and dating, a British ban on goodbye kisses | Dating in the News
More dating in the news:
- "Is it shallow to consider diet while dating?" (Helena Echlin's awesome Table Manners column, Chow.com).This reminded me of my Valentine's Day poll.
- "Bring back British romance!" (The School of Life blog). Apparently Virgin Rail is banning kissing at drop-off points near train stations. There seems to be so much symbolism in the company name and the fact they made the decision around Valentine's Day. Take a cold shower and think of England?
Dating in the news | January 31, 2009
It's that time of year again. Time for all the news organizations and websites to start pumping out stories about relationships in the run-up to Valentine's Day. Here are some highlights that I've come across recently (some are old stories, but new discoveries):
- Online dating -- Helping pathetic women get their hopes crushed more efficiently (The Onion)
- The man date (NY Times). Why guys keep a seat between them at the movies and more.
- Women are harder to read on the first date (UPI). The small sample size and the researcher's description of flirty-but-not-interested women as "deceptive" makes me distrust the results a bit.
- The dating go round (Science News). Lots of fascinating nuggets here: Uncertainty feeds attraction in the initial stages of relationships. Couples seek out emotional bonds at the earliest stages of relationships. Also, there's a big discrepancy between what people think they want and what they pursue (no surprise there).
- It's the economy, girlfriend (NYTimes). About a blog called Dating a Banker Anonymous. Um, any guy who consoles his colleague when your dad has just had a heart attack is a d-bag.
The other thing that keeps popping up is the He's Just Not That Into You movie, which I am kind of excited about.
Cougar Parties
I just came across this article on a cougar and prey younger man meet-and-greet in Danville, California. This is my favorite part (emphasis added):
More than 100 guests looking for liaisons, if not love, paid $10 each to mingle at the East Bay's first "Single Cougars Party"
I sort of admire cougars. Brazenly going after what they want, damn society's norms. I don't agree with Rich Gosse's comment that it's more conventional to be gay in San Francisco than it is to be a cougar -- wait, actually I kind of do.
Digression: San Francisco can be weird that way. In most places, people are most tolerant of the people most like them. For those people, tolerance and similarity are directly proportionate: the more different someone is, the more difficult it is to be tolerant of them. In San Francisco, sometimes it feels like that works to a certain degree, then the equation flips around and it becomes inversely proportionate. Cross-dressing wiccan astronaut? Good for you! Older woman with a younger man? Deplorable!
But reading Paul Lee's quotes gave me pause: this guy wants to date cougars so that he doesn't have to grow up or be responsible. (Maybe he should check this out.) Then I realized that if he only dates cougars, he's taking himself out of my and my friend's dating pools. Have at 'em, Paul!
A sidenote: A friend of mine used to go "cougar hunting" when he'd go to Monterey for surf trips. I need to find out more about this.

