The one thing I wish 14 years of schooling had taught me, but hadn't.

And that's that in the real world it's all about quantity, not quality.

I started my second job in a retail department store when I was 15. I was doing about two to three shifts a week, in perfect sync with my school hours.

I was recommended by a friend who already worked there. I did a maths test as part of my interview and scored 100%. I figured that all the extra-curricular activities listed on my resume impressed them. After all, school said they would, and school would never teach anything that wasn't true.

I felt appreciated. I went from someone arranging the racks to a cashier, to someone training the newbies, handling the cash flow and lay-by (sometimes the latter three at the same time). I had been at the company for two years, and my 18th birthday was coming round the mountain.

And that's exactly the point where my shifts were suddenly reduced to a single four hour shift every two weeks. It was like a plague that affected all of the almost 18 year olds. We soon noticed a bunch of newbies strutting their stuff into the staff room. While they were trying to be our friends, all we were thinking was "What the hell are you doing here?". We were fighting for shifts enough as it was.

Then we were informed of a new rule where you could only swap shifts with people your own age - or younger so as not to mess up the manager's budget on salaries.

You know those awkward situations with friends where you suddenly realise that they never really ever liked you, and it's humiliating because you thought so highly of them? Well, it was like that. The sudden influx of new, noticeably younger staff was the company's way of saying "Thanks for everything but we don't need you anymore. You're just too expensive. And it's because of your experience that we'll let you hang around just long enough to train the new people before wiping your name off our records." I guess it's kind of like how women feel when their husbands leave them for a young, ditsy slut with big boobs.

I immediately went for a Christmas casual job at another retail store. It was a relief to find a store that didn't think I was already due for retirement. I was getting about four shifts a week, more than the other Christmas casuals, two of whom were my friends. So I figured I must have been doing something right. That was, until I got the chicken pox. By the time I got better I didn't get any shifts. Sure it was a Christmas casual job, but was it so hard for them to tell me that I wasn't needed anymore than have me come in every week to check the roster? Walking out of the store empty handed was like the walk of shame when contestants are booted off a show, except this time you didn't know whether you were out or not.

I'm currently at another retail job that isn't age-ist. But we're sent home early during quiet days - which I guess is kind of understandable if you live 5 minutes away, and frustrating when you live 45 minutes away by train, up to 2 hours if there's track work - and that's not including the 45 minutes walk to and/or from the train station, or the 40 minute wait for the next bus that goes to your area.

A friend of mine works at a place where the staff are treated like walking dollar signs - and not like actual human beings with feelings. The manager will assign manual jobs that I doubt even superman could finish within the time the staff are given. The manager will say "Good job keep it up!" to my friend's face - and "Fuck he's slow, as if he hasn't had long enough to do those tasks" to another coworker. My friend's manager will also shave as much hours, commissions and bonuses off his employees' time sheets without it being noticeable, unless they closely scrutinised it. This same manager will also yell at casuals over the phone when they can't come into work. "Do you know what it means to be a casual?" he will scream. For him, being a casual means waiting next to the phone every minute of the day for the rest of your life and not having anything worth living for than going to a workplace that won't include you in the roster.

If you're reading this and have stories of your own, remember: sharing is caring.

Love, Noeline.
xox

One for you, Two for me

"Mine, mine, mine!" Have you ever noticed how much little kids love pointing out that something is theirs?

When we were young, my brother and I used to fight over the free tazos that come in packets of chips. When my other brother came along, I used to taunt that our mother was actually my mother, and my mother only. His response was to hug our mum in defense and cry. But some people never grow out of this possessiveness.

I have a quite a few friends who don’t tell their partner when they see or speak to a certain someone/s outside of their relationship. I ask them why. They say it’s because they know their partner will get angry. Or in other words, jealous.

But if lying includes the things you don’t say (and not just the things you do say that aren’t true), does it not then constitute, if not the slightest form of cheating? If the relationship was platonic, why would you go through all the effort of hiding it?

Is it not logically easier to have a fight, and get the compromising over and done with – than spend the rest of your life manoeuvring around particular friends without your partner’s knowledge? And even if the compromise meant a break up, then you’d leave… right? Bros before hoes? Chicks before dicks? BFF’s?

Well, apparently this is easier said than done when you’re in, or have been in this situation. I had a friend who practically disappeared off the face of the planet when she started going out with her on-again-off-again boyfriend. He made her delete every single contact number off her phone, save for him and her family. “But he’s good to me,” she says, trying to justify the situation. So almost any form of outside communication, including her conversation with me, was secretly devoured like a binge eating anorexic.

According to marriage and family therapist Joan Lachkar, such behaviour is actually a degenerate, more dangerous form of jealousy: envy. “ENVY… is destructive, possessive, controlling, and does not allow outside intruders in.” Bevan agrees. According to him, "Jealousy is… a protective reaction to a perceived threat to a valued relationship, arising from a situation in which the partner's involvement with an activity and/or another person is contrary to the jealous person's definition of their relationship.”

Another friend of mine said he was jealous upon finding out that a girl he used to like was now seeing someone else, even though he already had a girlfriend. I asked him if this jealousy meant that he would rather be with the other girl over his current girlfriend. “No, I’m jealous of the fact that another guy pulled the exact same moves I did, and that it worked out successfully for him, but not for me. That’s all.”

This resembles the politically correct definition of jealousy. Joan Lachkar explains that “Jealousy, unlike envy, is… whereby one desires the object, but does not seek to destroy it or the… rival.”

Sibling rivalry is also a common example. Take for example an anonymous contributor; let’s call him William. When he was young, William’s parents bought him a toy sword. A few days later, his brother was treated with an even bigger, better light-up sword. Not because it was his birthday, but because he got jealous of William. Now in their teens, William toiled for hours at a part time job in order to save for a laptop. His same brother got one for free, from their parents. Knowing that William would get jealous, they bought him an iPod.

Yet, another contributor admits that she has double standards when it comes to her boyfriend. She spends hours assuring her boyfriend that her boy friends seek her purely platonic company. But when it comes to her boyfriend spending time with his girl friends, she feels a littlelest, tiniest, teeniest pang of jealousy. “It reassures me that I still care for him. So a little jealousy is healthy,” she says.

If there’s one thing I’m jealous of, it’s of people who can drive. I’d have to work over two hours for a one hour driving lesson. And driving lessons would mean giving up my university degree, which requires me to study overseas for a year. I’m jealous that people can drive to work located nowhere near public transport. I’m jealous of people who don’t have to ask their friends’ parents to drive them around. I’m jealous of people who have parent/s who are confident enough to teach them how to drive, or have a parent who does live within the same proximity.

Coming from a broken family, I’m jealous that girls from a nuclear family are more likely to trust men than I am. As thankful as I am for the lessons my parent’s divorce has taught me, I’m jealous that for other girls, their template of a happy marriage is their parents’.

But since my mum says likens having a car to having a baby (the finance, the upkeep), and since I probably wouldn’t be as strong-willed and independent as I am had it not been for my parent’s divorce, then maybe it’s true that

“Jealousy is all the fun you think they had”
- Erica Jong (American writer and feminist, 1942).

So... what are you jealous of? Let it all out in the comments section. Adios amigos!

Love, Noeline.
xox

SOURCE
Bevan, J.L. 2004, ‘General partner and relational uncertainty as consequences of another person's jealousy expression’ in Western Journal of Communication, Vol. 68, pp. 195-218.

Welcome to my new home!

You've probably heard that we're currently in a global financial crisis. But if time is money, then I'm low on that too.

I'm not sure if you guys noticed, but I so got tired of waiting for my old blogdrive to load that I decided to make a new one with blogger. So far, its proved faster and easier to use.

I've also decided to mix the usual content with shorter snaps of whatever might be on my mind at the time.

So stay tuned, and remember the drill. Comment! I'm only one person. I can't think of everyone's thoughts. Kindly share your views with me and everyone else who reads this blog.

Love, Noeline.
xox

We might never again be as close as we used to be...

Opening up to Open Relationships

It all started when a girl at uni questioned why people on Facebook put their status as 'In an Open Relationship.' "You might as well tell everyone you're a slut," she exclaimed.

And it got me wondering: to what extent is this sentiment shared? I figured they must be common enough for it to even be an option. But in looking at the profiles of my 544 Facebook friends – only 3 were listed as 'In an Open Relationship.'

So I posed the following question: An open relationship is one where each partner is free to have sexual relations with other people. Do you think this type of relationship is acceptable? Do you think they can work?

Here's what some of you said…
• Any person who wants to be in an open relationship shouldn't be in one at all.
• A relationship should be between two people. Two people who love each other enough to be faithful to each other. To have sexual relations with others is stupid and selfish. [It's not that] the love and trust found in a normal relationship [isn't there, but] they have given parts of that away to their sexual relations.
• Well then [an open relationship] isn't really a relationship is it? Even the ancient civilisations got it wrong by having concubines… animals probably got it more right than half of the human race. Like ducks… they have one life mate.
• It isn't acceptable if you want your relationship to last. But if it's just to mess around, then it is acceptable. However I wouldn't practice it myself because I don't think it will last.
There's no real point in having that attraction if you're going to have intercourse with another.
• I think it will never work out especially if there are feelings attached. One person will eventually end up loving the other more and that is when the fight starts with jealousy and what not.
• It'll only work out if no one wants to get serious.
• How are you supposed to know whom you're compatible with if you don't explore?

Even though the final two points sound the most favourable, they still imply that in the end (after you want to become serious, and after you find out who you're compatible with) – emotional and physical monogamy is the way to go.

This suggests that the people who replied were all speaking from the same frame of thought - the result of a culture where monogamy is institutionalised in most western picture books, movies, government policies – even religion.

But despite such adversity, you don't even have to go to a parallel universe to see it thriving. The prevalence of open relationships since the 1960's (The Age 2004) suggest that they can, and do work - as long as you're dating people who are into the same type of open relationship. Take the following excerpt from television reality show The Secret Lives of Women:



DEE DEE ON SWINGING
Dee Dee is a swinger, she has a monogamous relationship with her husband – and their sexual activities with people outside of this primary relationship are considered separate. "We don't play with the same people on a continual, regular basis – because we'd be forming a relationship with them – we don't want to... I have one relationship and that's the one with my husband."

BRIGITTA ON POLYAMORY
"I'm polyamorous… [which] means 'many loves'… Polyamory is based on love, friendship, relationship – and it's definitely not multiple booty calls." Marcia, one of Brigitta's girlfriends stands by her polyamorous lifestyle by saying: "I don't really know why I should throw out one perfectly good relationship just because I meet somebody else amazing."

So maybe it's not about cheating on your partner through sexual relations with other people. Maybe it's about sustaining one, or many relationships without cheating ourselves out of our natural urgues i.e. sex. The point that people in open relationships are trying to make – and what a lot of people don't understand is that they're NOT a community of nymphomaniacs. For example, the YouTube clip above attracted comments like 'slut' and 'skank.'

According to Practical Polyamory, "Polyamory's opponents make alarmist, erroneous public statements in an attempt to gain support for their pro-traditional marriage agenda."

As Tristan Taormino, a New York sex educator puts it: "There are so many myths about open relationships. I think one of the most popular is that people in open relationships have intimacy issues and trouble with commitment. The assumption underlying this myth is that true intimacy can only be achieved between two people in a monogamous relationship. In other words, if you are emotionally and physically intimate with more than one person, it somehow dilutes the intimacy of each relationship. This is based on the notion that love is a quantifiable thing, like, if you have 100 pounds of love, you can give 100 pounds to your partner. But if you have multiple partners, you have to split the 100 pounds between them... Monogamy does not automatically equal intimacy and non-monogamy does not automatically equal lack of intimacy. Plus, non-monogamous relationships often involve the same level of commitment as monogamous ones."

Cass King, who is in a polyamorous marriage with her husband John Woods, agrees. "It's funny how it's easily understood that my love for my aunties doesn't diminish my love for my mother, but it's less acceptable to say that my love for my boyfriend doesn't diminish my love for my husband. It's like somehow the sex changes everything, confers an ownership on my love and on my body. I don't believe in that."

And numbers comparing marriage and divorce rates suggest that she isn't the only one. But with little, or no academic literature on the culture of open relationships – until then, let's join the dots.

According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics, "Over the past two decades, marriage rates have declined, while divorce rates have increased." Could, or moreover, is this a portal for open relationships?

Mind the age gap

WHEN I WAS IN PRIMARY SCHOOL, a class mate teased me for being "old". Born in September, I was in the same class as kids who were born the year after me, as far as June. Not because I started late; not because I repeated; but because, for reason(s) still unbeknown to myself, schools admit students across and halfway between two calendar years.

So when you get a class mate bragging about how "young" and therefore likeable to the opposite sex she is, you can imagine what kind of damage that does to the developing mind of a slightly older, gullible recipient.

It only seemed logical that I overhaul the list of boys I had a crush on, and base all future crushes on whether or not they were older than me; because to do otherwise would be unladylike (or rather, ungirlylike).

WHEN I WAS IN MY FIRST YEAR OF UNIVERSITY I had dinner with a boy who was five years my senior (and by senior, I'm speaking in exclusively biological terms).

Either I'm wise beyond my years, or he was actually ten years my junior (mentally and emotionally that is). Poor thing, someone must have told him that girls love hearing anecdotes about drunken tomfoolery.

--

So when it comes to relationships, is there such thing as being too old or too young for someone?

WATCH YOUR STEP

According to NewScientist.com, "Men want women younger than themselves because they are physically attractive… while women tend to prioritise a partner who can provide security and stability, and so tend to opt for older men." And since wealth is usually acquired with age, and since beauty comes (I mean, goes) with age, is it any wonder why younger women tend to marry older men?

One theory suggests that men are most compatible with women half their age, plus seven (AllPhilosophy.com). So if you're a 20 year-old male, it's best to be with a 17 year-old female; which is only a three year age gap. But when you're a 30 year-old male, this means a 22 year-old woman; and the gap is now 8 years. Then, as a 40 year old man, the theory recommends a 27 year-old woman. And now the gap is stretched to 13 years.

So happens when the age gap spans more than the norm of five years, let alone in the opposite direction?

Shei Tan, in her article Understanding Age Gap Relationships, contends that "If the male is considerably older and he and his wife do what he wants, she may miss out on a phase of her experience which… she may always regret." On the other hand, "If they do what she enjoys most, he is being dragged through the same experiences twice…" The same applies in reverse.

For example, in the Sex and the City Movie, when bride to be, Carrie Bradshaw's small guest list swells to the size of a celebrity wedding (with the publicity to match), her fiancée John James Preston, otherwise known as Mr. Big says: "This is my third marriage. How do you think that makes me look?" Speaking from a "been there done that" mentality, he prefers a low key ceremony at the New York City Hall.

So what more if an older partner has kids from a previous marriage?

---

IN SICKNESS AND IN HEALTH

Forum after forum, the general disposition was that regardless of age, love conquers all, "it's all that matters". But an age "gap of 20 years means that one of you will be a sprightly 45-year-old, while the other will be approaching retirement… Are you comfortable with the idea of becoming someone's live-in carer rather than live-in lover?" (NineMSN Health).

Claiming the emotional devastation too much, one forum member was so fed up with outliving his wives, he went back to dating women his own age.


Tony Randall was 50 years older than Heather Randall.
They married in 1995, and had two children in 1997 and 1998.
He passsed away in 2004.

---

WHO'S YOUR (SUGAR) DADDY?

As Good Charlotte, in their song Girls & Boys point out, "Girls don't like boys/Girls like cars and moneeeeeey!"

One Yahoo! forum member admitted that his "girlfriend dated a 40+ when she was 20 but she… was basically [in it] for the fancy dinners and flights on the plane… that a 20 something likely couldn't [afford]." But to what extent is this true? NewScientist.com argues that "men evolved a preference for younger women because [they] have a longer fertility span than older female[s]… women, meanwhile, might give birth to more children when they choose older partners because such men are likely to have greater financial resources to support a family than younger men do."

But in a capitalist society, why settle for financially stable when you can find the financially well-off on such sites as SugarDaddie.com? It's a dating website "where the classy, attractive, and affluent meet." It allows "Doctors, Lawyers, Busy Professionals, [and] Benefactors" access to "Beautiful, Intelligent and Classy Women & Models." And while those of us who don't make the cut scoff at their elitist standards as shallow, one testimonial on their website praises that the

…site has given men and women with higher standards somewhere to go…
the reason a lot of women come here isn't to find some one to "take care of us".
The thing is... a gentleman who has aquired a lot of money is generally educated,
not lazy, intelligent, more tolerant and well travelled as a result.
[As opposed to] someone who's never been anywhere or experienced anything
and content to sit on a couch and watch t.v. all weekend. I wanted a man
who could inspire me, fascinate me and whom I would look up to, and I found
him here on sugardaddie.

And while the supposed lower class troll though night clubs and pubs for that special (albeit drunk) someone, another happy customer claims that SugarDaddie "sets the standard for professional people who want to meet likeminded individuals they won't find in bars!!"



Michael Douglas is 25 years older than Catherine Zeta Jones



Woody Allen is 35 years older than wife Soon-Yi Previn

---

THE COUGAR

Angela, who appeared on The Dr. Phil Show reveals: "I have always dated younger men. They tend to be more fun, don't have the baggage and they're better in bed." Such baggage includes ex wives and children from previous relationships. And keep your hearts peeled, because these kind of relationships are on the rise.

EG:
* In Desperate Housewives, Gabrielle Solis has an affair with her teenage gardener John - a carefree alternative to her more serious, business oriented husband; or Samantha Jones
* In Sex and the City, Samantha Jones (who is in her 40's) has a serious relationship with model Jerry Jarrod (in his 20's)

Young men are attracted to the independence, self-assurance and sexual experience of Cougars. Growing up, men their own age valued them for their beauty - and now younger men are valuing them for their brains.

Log on to UrbanCougar.com, and you are served with a platter of the Cougar culture. 2008 Urban Cougar of the Year, Debra Garret explains:

We cougars know what we want, we are not afraid to speak our minds about
sex, politics, sports, money, and I believe we are great role models for the
young girls of today. It also means "empowerment" - we are not afraid to tell
our men what we want or need and we do not play games.



Demi Moore is 15 years older than husband Ashton Kutcher



Susan Sarandon is 12 years older than Tim Robbins


Halle Berry is 10 years older Gabriel Aubry

But age gap relationships run the risk of taking on the qualities of a parent and child. "There is nothing worse than having to beg your young lover to make his bed in the morning. Conversely, older males may become frustrated with a young partner's desire to go to a rave and worsen a developing hearing problem" (DatingFor Beginners.info).

---

And my two cents? I think it's less about age, than it is about compatibility through maturity. And if the age gap is large enough to separate life stages (eg: if one person is still in uni and the other wants marriage and kids), then sacrifice and compromise is key. After all, love is blind, you can't see numbers.

What do you think? Share your opinions and experiences via the comment link below.

Bumping into the ex-boyfriend's friend

ADMIT IT. We've all fantasised about bumping into an ex boyfriend. In theory, we're healthy, immaculate and content – whereas he's fat, haggard and forlorn.

I barely recognised you with your beer belly! Where'd all your hair go? Oh, you're a drug dealer now. That's err… nice.

But as we all know, this rarely goes to plan. In practice, we bump into them on the days we're not wearing any make-up; the days we're so sick we look like our eyes got pepper sprayed; and the days we have a MASSIVE pimple.

A few weeks ago an ex boyfriend and I crossed paths. My heart was beating so fast it could have qualified for the Olympics. And it wasn't because all the old feelings came surging back. It was more out of shock, because, for years, he was as good as dead. So yes, it was like practically seeing a zombie.

But if there's one thing that's caught me even more off guard – it's bumping into an ex boyfriend's friend. Mutual friends aside, I'm talking about the ones who were 'just there'. The ones you never really had a problem with. The ones that, for some reason or other, you just didn't 'click' with.

What are you supposed to do? They probably hate you on behalf of your ex anyway. Is there any point in saying hello? If you don't they'll think you're a super bitch for snobbing them; and if eye contact has already been established it probably counts as a 'dirty'. But if you do, they'll think you're a sad bitch for making the pointless effort.

There are lots of philosophies I live by. And one of them is that you never really, truly know someone until after a break up. It spoke volumes when it came to ex boyfriends. Then it grew to encompass myself. But most recently, I've discovered that it extends so far as friends – mine, his and ours.

You come to realise which of his friends were nice to your face but "never really liked [you] anyway". You come to realise which people, who you once considered close friends, feel the need to gossip about the details of your break up, than ask you yourself.

And here's the 360. I saw parts of myself reflected in these people. There are friends whose boyfriends I myself don't approve of, other than the fact that he (for some unknown reason) makes her happy. I don't say anything because I feel like it's not my place to say. Who am I to play cupid when I have enough trouble with my own love life?

And that's when I realised, the more people you try to gratify the more you stop being yourself. What's the point in trying to win the hearts of his friends, when you don't even want his?

At this time in my life, there are five people whose opinions matter to me. How many people are you trying to please?

Emotional VS Physical Cheating

Tis my opinion every man cheats in his own way, and he is only honest who is not discovered - Susannah Centlivre (English Playwright, 1669-1723)

OVER the past few weeks, I've been asking people which they think is worse: emotional or physical cheating; and why.

But with my inbox resembling something like the Sahara desert, I started to wonder why less people were responding to a topic as juicy as cheating, than my previous blog about seeing people.

When conducting surveys for blogs such as this, I find that folks on MSN, MySpace and/or Facebook are like the cyberspace equivalent of those people who don't hide behind their couch from Jehovas witnesses, who will give telemarketers their time of day, and buy overpriced raffle tickets from eight year olds. So you'd understand my disappointment when it turned out to be a goldmine of replies like "What do you mean?"

And that's when I realised, most people don't even know there's a difference.

So let's start at square one. According to the American Heritage Dictionary, to cheat is "To be sexually unfaithful."



And thanks to the trusty ol' television, this is the definition we've been conditioned to associate cheating with.

Take the classic scenario: faithful husband comes home early from work. He then opens the bedroom door to find his wife getting jiggy with his brother, his best friend or the next-door neighbour. She then pleads: "This isn't what it looks like, I can explain!"

Since by this time, the husband has surrenderingly stormed out of the room, I have taken it upon myself to do at least some the explaining for her.

---

Physical cheating involves hugging, kissing and sex sans the emotional attachment. There are no intentions of it blossoming into a proper relationship. There are no flowers, no chocolates, no romantic dinners, no getting to know the family, no caring about the other persons work life, no getting to know their friends. Think booty calls, one night stands and fuck buddies.

Between the cracks of physical cheating is emotional cheating. According to Dr. Gail Saltz, this type of affair occurs when "there is a deep connection without physical affection… the spouse is replaced by the lover who then becomes the primary source of companionship and emotional well being."

She goes on to reveal that, often "the cheater is guilt-free. After all, they claim, if there is no sex, it can't possibly be an affair!"

In every other aspect of our lives, we're taught that the sky is the limit: so dream big and aim high. How many people would willingly change jobs if another one was closer to home, paid more and was less labour strenuous? How many people have bought new mobile phones when their old one wasn't even broken? How many of our parents buy new cars when the old one did the job? How many families have replaced their rear screen televisions sets with flat screens, and/or their VCR with a DVD player? How many people have replaced their boom box with iPod speakers?

Given the chance, few people stick with the old gizmos out of loyalty if something else makes them happier, is more convenient, and caters better to their needs. But do relationships apply?

According to Truth About Deception, a website dedicated to delivering "Advice about Lying, Infidelity, Love and Romance," "spouses cheat because of problems in their relationship - something is missing, passion has faded, partners feel lonely, people find someone who treats them better or who appreciates them more than their current spouse."

" target="_self">

"We all have emotional needs, on so many different levels, that you can't ever expect one person to fulfill them all. The flipside of that coin is, you can't be so presumptuous and egocentric to assume that you're going to be able to be someone's everything… that is obviously the ideal, it's what we're striving for, it's what romantic comedies are based on, but we don't live in the movies, we live in real life."

So with this logic in mind let's think of people as plants. Water alone doesn't nourish us. Sometimes we could do with a little fertilizer. Oftentimes we need the sun. Too much of one is harmful.

And so in going back to our three friends mentioned at the beginning of this entry, maybe our adultress felt belittled by her husband for being unrealistic. Maybe she had lifelong aspirations of becoming a Hollywood actress; and her new lover sincerely believed she had talent. Whether or not she ended up sleeping with the new man, in sharing her aspirations and drawing support from him and not her husband – she would have been guilty of emotionally cheating nonetheless.

" target="_self">

This is how "you can be in love with two people at the same time… for two different sets of reasons. They're both fulfilling part of you in different ways."

Some people argue that while emotional cheating is uncontrollable, acting upon it is a fully conscious process. As stated in the clip above, "You don't have control over emotions. That's what emotion is. It's separate from your reason… Reason is about thinking things through."

But to what extent is this true? According to Truth About Deception, "For millions of years, people who cheated on their mates reproduced faster than more sexually reserved individuals… So now the desire to cheat is a universal part of our human nature - something we inherited a long time ago from our cheating ancestors."

According to The Times Online, "A study at St Thomas' Hospital in London has suggested that 40 per cent of the variability in female infidelity is genetic…"

---

The members of a forum on LoveShack.org – a "interpersonal relationship center," discuss what exactly constitutes cheating. These include:

Kissing
1. kiss on the cheek
2. kiss on the lips (a short peck)
3. kiss with tounge


Physical Contact
1. Hug (i.e. when meeting and saying goodbye)
2. A long hug
3. Cuddling
4. Spooning
5. Dancing without any bumping and grinding
6. Dancing with bumping and grinding
7. Lap dance from a stripper or other person
8. Back massage
9. Full body massage
10. Playing footsie


Flirting
1. Flirting with a friend
2. Flirting with a stranger


Sleeping
1. Sleeping in the same bed without physical contact
2. Sleeping in the same bed with physical contact (for example hugging, cuddling, spooning)
3. Sleeping in the same bed with kissing and physical contact (see above)
4. Sleeping in the same bed in the nude without physical contact
5. Sleeping in the same bed and having sexual contact


Sex
1. Oral sex
2. Digital stimulation (fingering) Hand Stimulation (hand job)
3. Conventional sex with penetration or genital contact (penis/vagina, vagina/vagina, penis/anus)


Nudity
1. Being naked in the presence of another person
2. Both parties being naked (w/o contact)
3. Showering with another person (w/o contact)
4. Showering with another person (w contact)
5. Attending a strip club (w/o contact)


Masturbation
1. One person masturbating in front of another
2. Mutual masturbation (w/o contact)
3. Mutual masturbation (with contact)

Truth About Deception has even compiled a list of their own.

* Flirt with others
* Engage in sexual talk with someone else
* Exchange personal e-mails or text messages
* Deny being married or in a relationship
* Spend time with specific individuals
* Engage in specific types of contact – sleeping in the same bed with another person
* Purchase intimate gifts and presents for others
* Chat online with someone else (online affairs)
* Have sexual contact with someone else (physical infidelity)
* Become emotionally involved with someone else (emotional infidelity)
* Develop a crush or feelings for another individual
* Share their most private thoughts and feelings with someone else
* Become best friends with someone of the opposite sex

In particular, the final point won my attention. Since when did becoming friends with someone of the opposite sex count as cheating? Is that to say that as soon as you enter a relationship you might as well stop making friends of the opposite sex in case they become a best friend? And what if you were best friends with someone of the opposite sex before the relationship?

"Sorry. I've found someone else to share my most private thoughts with. Call you later if it doesn't work out." Thankfully my boyfriend and best friend have never been the same person, so I've never had to say those words; nor have I ever lost two of the most important people in my life in one hit.

---

So now that we've sussed out cheating's ways, shapes and forms – which is worse? Here's what you guys said…

- Emotional, because physical is only skin deep. I mean, everyone has physical needs. It's normal. I mean nothing is wrong with physical interaction in the right situation. But in terms of cheating it will almost always lead to emotional complications so you're screwed either way.

- Sex is sex. We're only human and we make mistakes. That's the problem with monogamy. Humans weren't made for it.

- Emotional, because everyone gets physical – we're human.

- I would think that physical is the lesser evil, but I think both are equally hurtful. Both break trust within the relationship.

- Emotional for sure… it goes against principles. If you try to explain why you did it, [they] should be used to explain why you shouldn't even be in the relationship in the first place.

- Each to their own. Where physical is just downright unacceptable in terms of standards and norms, I think emotional is what would kill the most at the end of the day. Not saying I'd prefer to have either one inflicted upon me, but if I had to choose, I'd rather the physical - but only if it would warrant absolute emotional detachment.

- Emotional cheating. The reason why you are in the relationship in the first place was because of emotions and feelings felt towards your partner… in reality emotional cheating would be the instigator of physical cheating… Even if the emotional connection doesn't turn physical, it still damages a current relationship… because when you're in a relationship you should only feel emotionally close to the one you're with.

---

After this topic was discussed on the Tyra Banks Show, viewers were able to respond by sharing their experiences through the show's forum. Here's a few…

My husband is in the military, he's enlisted and he has an emotional bond with a female officer. At first I thought she was nice, as times passed, my husband would constantly talk about her. What would really bother me, is when i'd talk about my day with our son, he'd all of a sudden change the subject about this female officer. Over time, he would always talk about her. After work, she would call him, about personal things not related to work. Or he would call her back and speak about personal relationship things, he said it was strictly advice. It got to the point where, since being in the same office, daily they'd talk about her relationship and our relationship.
Posted by: Michiko | December 16, 2007 2:01 AM


My boyfriend is emotionally cheating on me. His ex is everything to him. He hasn't been with her for years but he still loves her. Like not too long ago I found a picture of them together happy smiling in a video game box here in OUR apartment! He swears it was just in a jacket that he brought from his dads. But since we have been together he's worn that jacket… we've actually talked about if he could have any girl in the world who it would be...and its her…
Posted by: Kimi | November 28, 2007 10:47 AM

---

So for anyone with a now clearer picture of cheating, anyone who experienced an epiphany about cheating while reading this blog, or anyone who wasn't able to share their thoughts earlier – please do so in via the comment link at the end of this entry or the comment box in the left hand column of this page. I'd love to hear what you think!


Ciao!

I do, therefore I am.

As you get older, you'll find the only things you regret are the things you didn't do – Zachary Scott, 1914-1465, Actor

I believe that in order to make something of my life, I need to make something of every single day in it. For me, one of the worst feelings in the world is falling asleep with the knowledge that I achieved nothing.

Which is probably why I don't watch much tv, and why I love being busy - and therefore why there is no such thing as being busy watching tv.

When I'm occupied, I don't have the time (or reason) to complain about why my life isn't going anywhere.

And as the last of my teenage years rears its ugly head, I've been feeling a sudden need to reassess the things I have yet to achieve.

THINGS TO DO BEFORE I DIE

• Save enough money to live in Spain for a year
• Maintain a credit average to keep my scholarship and graduate from uni
• Secure a career in the media industry (magazine, advertising, public relations)
• Visit my grandmother in the Philippines
• Honeymoon in Hawaii
• See the pyramids and the Sphinx in Egypt
• Get my car and motorbike licence
• Buy a sewing machine and learn how to use it
• Learn how to knit
• Fly a kite
• Adopt at least one child
• Write a book
• Do missionary work
• Learn how to play an instrument
• Skydive
• Marry and grow old with someone who makes me happy
• Raise my kids in a quiet town, somewhere halfway between the city and the country
• Invest in properties
• Learn how to cook !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
• Learn how to do my own laundry !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
• Paint my own paintings to display on the walls of my house
• Get a massage without laughing
• Watch a sunset
• Go camping and/or fishing
• Watch the Oprah show live in studio
• Learn photography and silkscreening
• Visit as many art galleries as possible
• Learn how to ice-skate and rollerblade

Everyone has things they want to accomplish in life. For a few good years, mine were pretty much running riot in the back of my mind. I found taming them into a list quite like I find cleaning: theraputic.

There are two kinds of people:
(1) People who have wish lists and hope for magic.
(2) People have to-do lists and make magic happen.
So which one are you?

Tesing 1, 2, 3

I believe that there are two main ways of getting to know a stranger: as a potential friend, or as a potential partner.

Let's explore what happens when you're just friends for too long.
Scenario 1: "I love you... you're like a brother to me!"
Scenario 2: "I can't go out with you because I don't want to ruin our friendship; like what if we break up? Things will never be the same."
Scenario 3: "I'm in love with (insert name, not your name, here)! What should I do?"

A friend of mine admitted to me: "I have to be at least a bit of an asshole. I don't want to just be the nice guy. Nice guys don't get the girl". So why are nice girls attracted to the bad guy? Dr Connel Cowan and Dr Melvyn Kinder, authors of Smart Women Foolish Choices state "A woman may experience a man as being kind, responsible and caring – not a bad combination – but she may ultimately lose interest if there is no dynamic tension, no excitement or mystery".

So apart from being an asshole, how does a guy get to know a girl without hitting any of the above, dead end scenarios? Because at the other end of the spectrum, there are also girls who won't go out with a guy she barely knows.

Kind of like the Loch Ness monster, Bigfoot and the female G-spot - an equilibrium is alleged to exist somewhere in what they call 'seeing someone'. But as I have discovered, this middle ground is more complicated than it's extremes.

What does it even mean to see someone? Can you see more than one person at a time? And are there physical boundaries with the people you see? If not, what's the difference between a slut/manwhore, and someone who sleeps with everyone they're seeing?

Here's what you guys said:

• I think the term "seeing someone" is used when the communication lines aren't clear.
However if an individual in the relationship says that he/she is "seeing him/her", they would like the relationship to eventuate, but is uncertain as to the feelings of the other individual.
Plus, it would be more diplomatic, less embarrassing, & easier to explain that things didn't workout because "the relationship status wasn't really 'official'.
And as for physical boundaries, it depends on the individual. Of course I don't think it is necessary to jump into bed after a half hour of grinding on the dance floor.

• Isn't it like try before you buy styles? You both know you like each other and act as a couple just starting out but it doesn't mean you can't like someone else too. That's why you're seeing whom you like more.

• 'Seeing someone' is a mutual thing I guess. You like each other but you're not official. Technically you're single but you're not completely open to mingle around because you've got that 'potential someone'. Physical boundaries? I guess that depends on the individual.

• 'Seeing someone' is an unofficial commitment to someone. However, the commitment is so small that it allows you to see other people at the same time. And when you see someone there are no physical boundaries, but it all depends on what they're comfortable with.

• I think that 'seeing someone' is testing out the waters with that particular person. Mutual understanding that you both like each other. No strings attached. But I don't think that it is right to be seeing more than one person at a time, but I guess it depends on how long you've been seeing the person. If it's been a couple of weeks or months and you've started to see a new person I would see it as wrong. And as for physical boundaries, I reckon it would depend on their views on things.

• It's between the people seeing each other to decide that.

• To see someone means that you're more than friends, but aren't exactly bound together in a relationship. Yeah, I think you can see more than one person at a time, but don't expect the other person to approve. And I don't think there are physical boundaries.

• 'Seeing someone' is like testing the water before you jump in. You want to see if they would change when you consider them a partner. And you want to see how people around you respond when they find out you're involved.

• You're seeing if they're worth getting into a relationship with. No, I don't think you can see more than one person at a time. Physical boundaries: not far.

• 'Seeing someone' is practically committing themselves to each other, but without the title.

• If you believe in monogamy then of course there are physical boundaries. 'Seeing someone', can be taken as a fling, a summer romance or simply a fuck. People these days have forgotten the notion of dating. People dive headfirst into full on 'going out' relationships.

• 'Seeing someone' is a process some couples with mutual feelings test run a relationship. No you can't see more than one person at a time. There is no specific title; but the way I see it, if someone asks if you have a girlfriend/boyfriend, the right answer would be "No, but I am seeing someone". If one person decides to have feelings for another person, they'll have to be open about it to the person they're seeing. No one likes to be a side dish!

It just goes to show that if you're seeing someone, you can't guarantee they aren't sleeping with someone else.

Could seeing someone merely be an excuse to be unfaithful?

Is it possible to cheat on people you're only seeing?

Is it a double standard by western society, against the taboo cultures where polygamy (multiple marriage) is a norm? Think traditionalist Islam, Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and Mormon fundamentalists.
What's worse: someone who has hundreds of one night stands in their lifetime, impregnates some and fathers none - or someone who has thirty kids to five different wives, and yet supports all of them? (For the sake of not going even more off track, I'll leave this heavily contestable issue for another blog entry).

What did catch my attention was the word 'mutual'. How do you know something is mutual without talking about it? Wouldn't that mean making assumptions about the other person's feelings? Are these the very people who feel 'lead on' when their feelings aren't reciprocated?

I apologise to anyone who was expecting a solid answer by the end of this blog. I was hoping to have one myself. Trying to answer one question opened up a whole bunch of unanswerable others. Consider this entry not just food for thought, but an all-you-can-eat for thought. And just when you thought official relationships were complicated enough.

Bonne appétit, ya'll!