Finding Love on the Internet
- 1. You cannot find love on the internet. Why not? Because love is not a pizza or a new pair of socks.
- Can you find a love by searching on the internet and then doing the same legwork that Gramma did?
Yes. Why? Because we are human beings and the majority of human beings want love.
The woman asks:
But what about all those men out there who just want sex?
Answer:
Well, let me ask you a question, dearie.
What did you think that package between his legs was for? You see it’s there for more than growing that stupid looking goatee around his mouth. (Aside. Do you think most guys realize that the word ‘goatee’ comes from the word goat. I mean style is important but do we really want to look like a farm animal? I mean, what if it became the style to look like a hog? Just asking.)
All that equipment down in the hold is there to facilitate the sharing of his DNA with a member of the opposite sex for the purpose of producing a little beauty. So, let’s start by not blaming men for something they were born to perform.
It’s a given then; men want sex, they always have, they always will.
You should know that cyber dating is no short cut to finding your soul mate. Finding that special person is just as difficult today as it ever was. It is helpful to remember, however, that you have a tremendous advantage on your side even before you turn on your computer. You see, you are the offspring of an uncountable number of successful pair-bonds in your ancestry. In all likelihood, you have inherited the specialized DNA that gives you the perspicacity and even the personality to select a mate to fulfill your pair-bonding instinct.
But, but, but! Finding your partner is no easier for you than for your great, great, great grandmother.
There is no short cut to the meet-reject tango that is de rigueur for the searcher that is looking for a mate to fill out the pair-bonding dance card. You’ve got to slog your way through a lot of ‘dances’ to find your life partner.
I’m not talking about a bed mate here. Bed mates are easier to find than beer drinkers at a wet ‘T-shirt’ contest. And recreational mating is now accepted in our society, stigma free…but is it really stigma free? No, at least not by men.
Just wait a damn minute here. Men are the ones that push so hard for ‘commitment free’ liaisons.
Yes they are.
Isn’t that just the old double standard that Gramma had to deal with.
Yes it is.
So, let me get this straight. Men want sex, sex, sex, sex and then more sex and then they want to turn around and pair-bond with some pure virgin.
Now you got it, Babe.
Well, damn them to hell and back. That just isn’t fair!!!!!
No, it isn’t is it?
I hate men!
No, you don’t. And even if you really wanted to, you couldn’t.
You’re just a typical male chauvinist.
Of course. You’re right. But I’m the one in the happy pair-bond relationship.
Sure, go ahead, rub it in…… so, you want me to meet all these guys and never sleep with them. Is that it?
Only if you want a pair-bond relationship.
How will I know if I’ve finally found Mr. Pair-Bond?
Oh, you’ll know sweety. You’ll know. Keep your legs crossed until your heart speaks to you. And when it does finally speak, you will know exactly what to do. Good luck and bon voyage.
Dr. Cliffe founded thepostandbugle website for men. Unfortunately thepostandbugle does not allow in women readers. Please respect our privacy. Thank you.
Dr. Cliffe is a molecular biologist and successful international entrepreneur. He has four children and has travelled extensively in North America and the far east. He is the founder of thepostandbugle.com which was formed to combat the most virulent devaluation, in American history, of boys and men.
Dr. Cliffe’s favorite hobby is offending the Politically Correct with self-mocking satire and uncomfortable reality.
Dr. Cliffe’s most memorable quote: “We all know that Al Gore invented the internet and that the Democrats invented compassion but do I ever get any recognition for inventing the erection?” Read more at The Post and Bugle
Online Dating News & Advice Right in Your Inbox
By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Notice and European users agree to the data transfer policy.
I would like to make it clear that this post does not reflect the opinion of the female half of the Urban Dater. I in no way endorse or agree with the above post.
For an article entitled “Finding Love on the Internet”, this sure doesn’t discuss ANY of those topics (okay, okay, arguably “finding” is covered).
I get (I can’t say “appreciate”) the pulls-no-punches anti-PC irreverent persona the author is going for (I also can’t say “achieves”). At BEST it comes off as grandmatronly. But at least Dr. Ruth knows that women like to fuck too.
Is this topic anything that was necessary or clamored for? Were Limbaugh and the Catholic League already overloaded with poorly thought out anti-sex screeds? Even the make-believe woman the author “interviews” is too good for this claptrap. Because no woman has had that conversation (especially not with this guy). And it never happened. Ever.
Apologies if this is all some sort of marketing jiujitsu to make magazines like Cosmo look like paragons of reasonable sex and relationship advice. In that case well done, because this dude sounds like he has no experience with either (or, for that matter, humans in general).
You guys are better than this.
I seriously don’t understand what point the author is trying to make here. I mean, really what is this article about? It starts by talking about love on the internet and then suddenly it’s talking about Grandma and sex and double standards. So, seriously, what is the point of this article?
What FRESH HELL is this? I am coming out of lurking (and I am practically a professional lurker, yo) to comment because I find this post so utterly absurd and terrible. Now THAT is some serious motivation.
To start with, I am not entirely sure that the writing in this post even makes sense. By “not entirely sure,” I mean I am 100% sure that this post is mostly incoherent.
Let me clarify what I think I *am* understanding here. So if the hetero ladies would like to “catch a man,” so to speak, they need to avoid having sexytimes until they find the one they love? This is problematic for A MILLION REASONS. Lemme break it down for you, “Dr.”
One: Wow! That’s super slut-shamey and yes, does encourage a terrible double standard. I’m glad you have the foresight to acknowledge that. Who do you think all those men are fucking? Oh, right, I guess it’s one lady who puts out, while the others hold off? I always did find it funny that the dudes who were so concerned about “sluttiness” never could discern that a sexually assertive, confident woman–er, sorry, BIG OL’ WHORE is the person you want to partner with for a lifetime of excellent blowjobs.
Two: You seem to be under the impression that this is only insulting to women. I don’t know about the rest of y’all readers out there, but I am pretty sure that equating men with wild animals is insulting to them as well. One of the most terrible things about male sexuality is the idea that man is a machine, which enforces the idea that there is only one type of attractiveness, that men cannot have nuanced sexuality or preferences (input A must have output B, etc.), and that men must Perform Perfectly at all times to truly be worthy of being deemed “manly.”
Three: The words “pair-bond” make me shudder with disgust. You operate on the assumption that ladies never look to have sex for pure pleasure, and that men never seek relationships. I suspect that you have not ventured outside much, have you?
Four: URBAN DATER!!!! Y’all have it in you to be way more cool than this–you both are way too smart to be posting this tripe. It’s reassuring to know that at least one half isn’t endorsing it.
This isn’t even touching on half of the problems, but there’s a few to start with. Start chewing.
I have to say that as a male, I’m pretty disappointed that the author feels that men only want that one thing. While I understand the male psyche and nature of wanting to reproduce; I almost feel like it’s a misrepresentation of men everywhere.
Now please don’t misunderstand me, while I did enjoy the satire with a small smirk on my face, I feel like there was no clear cut message to be read… Almost as if this post was created by the author with a troll face (no offense if any). I felt like the topic that was supposed to be discussed was simply a lure and a bastardization of what the topic was supposed to represent. Even as a satire piece: while you clearly were able to rattle the cages a bit, I felt like the topic itself was misconstrued and that this was simply a bash against women while using the ‘humor’ as a mask.
Needless to say, I think the attempt was poorly executed…
To quote T.S. Eliot — “Human beings cannot tolerate too much reality.” A life lived in the pleasant reverie of self-delusion is indeed more pleasurable than waking up to hard reality. And this is why I prefer the company of men. — Dr. Heath Cliffe
@thepostandbugle Way to non-respond to everything addressed. Thanks Mr-non-doctor-with-the-fake-name-that-is-either-a-reference-to-Wuthering-Heights-or-a-cartoon-cat.
@thepostandbugle Ohhhhhh. You prefer the company of men. That explains perfectly why, when it comes to women, you haven’t a clue what you’re talking about. Thank you for clarifying.
@thepostandbugle Ohhhhhh. You prefer the company of men. That explains perfectly why, when it comes to women, you haven’t a clue what you’re talking about. Thank you for clarifying.
A New National Daytime Talk Show is seeking women who need help finding Mr. Right. If your dating life has more blunders than blasts, and your dating diary can be summed up using the title of a natural disaster flick, then we want to hear from you. We’re looking for women desperate to get out of the strike-zone who need Steve’s help finding and catching Mr. Right.
If you would like to be considered for this nationally syndicated daytime television show, taping in the Chicago area, please email us at [email protected]