ClueChick: real clues from a real chick

In response to yesterday's post, aaron wrote that he used to have a set of criteria in people he was looking for, but after finding several people who fit those criteria but with whom the relationship ended badly, making him question those things he thought he wanted.

This is an excellent point: Often enough, the things we think we want turn out to be all wrong for us. This leads to the womanwho chases "bad boys" and then bemoans the way she iss treated in that relationship. Or to the man who wants only tall, beautiful blondes but finds them vapid and boring after the initial shimmer has worn off.

It's important to think about what you want in a relationship, whether serious or casual. If you don't know what you want, you'll have a difficult time finding it, though, I'll admit, not impossible. Additionally, if you find something, it'll be hard for you to know if it's the sort of thing you're looking for. It's very useful to know, in a general way, what you want.

On the other hand, it's not useful to limit yourself to too narrow a set of options. If you only want a woman between 5'4" and 5'6" with long hair who runs marathons and reads Chaucer, you're limiting yourself a lot. And many of those characteristics may not actually be relevant to the success of your interaction.

So it pays to make note of the things that you like in friends and former lovers. What are personality traits that worked for you? What didn't? Learning what works and moving on from there is a much more successful strategy than banging your head against the wall.

Posted by ClueChick at 10:52 AM in misc tips | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

Every woman -- every person -- looking for a specific kind of relationship, be it romantic, sexual, or some other, has certain rules or categories they want their new person to fit. I've talked about some of mine: age, honesty, and the like. Other women might look for men of a certain height, race, or income level. Some of these state rules are hard-and-fast, and she won't bend on them. Others... less so.

For example, my typical age cut-off is 40. But if a guy gets in touch with me and really shows off his other attributes, but he's 42... well, I'll probably keep up contact with him, because it doesn't pay to be too rule-bound. On the other hand, I don't bend on the cheating issue, because I know that cheating makes me feel yucky.

Additionally, there are lots of categories that a woman isn't stating, but she's hoping to find someone who fits them. These might be things like a certain attitude or approach to life and the world. Or someone who does some of the same activities she does. Or someone with a really kickass view from his apartment. Who knows, right? And among these unstated categories, some of them she's aware of, and some of them just impact how she feels about a guy -- these are those ephemeral-seeming things that just make us go all gooey when we meet him or talk to him.

So, if you're an older guy responding to a woman's who has stated that you're out of her preferred age-range, but you're convinced that, based on her ad or profile, not only is she going to rock your world, but that you are going to rock hers, then your job is to convince her of that. And this is true of any of her stated categories. She says she wants X, and you're Y, but you can tell that this is an outstanding case. What do you do?

First and foremost, don't waste your time trying to convince her that her categories are off or wrong or that you're somehow better than guys who fit her rules. This is insulting to her, and it won't get you anywhere, because she's already made up her mind about what her rules are, and hearing you blather on about how you're a young-looking 50, or you have more stamina than men in her age range because you're vastly younger than she's looking for, is probably going to make her laugh. This also probably won't work because you have to assume the reason for her narrowing her field as she did, and you're probably going to be wrong. (I.e., I don't care how old or young someone looks, so whenever someone tries to convince me to go up a few years by talking about how young he looks, it misses the mark.)

The thing to do is to read her profile or her ad very carefully, see what she's looking for that you do fit, and try to figure out if you can pick up on any of the things that she's not explicitly stating. Then, write her an email singing your own praises. She wants someone to keep her company at the wine bar? Talk about your adventures in wine country as a young man, when you apprenticed with several well-known vineyards. She wants someone who will go down on her for hours and hours? Talk about the delight you take in cunnilingus. If you can inject your email with sincerity and enthusiasm, it'll be awfully convincing.

Go ahead and state up front that you know you miss the mark on whatever category it might be, and then say, "But I'm writing you, anyway, because ..." and knock her socks off with the proof. Don't ignore the rule, don't make light of it, but show off just how fantastically well-matched you are. It may or may not work; you never know which of any given woman's rules are breakable, but if you're going to try, that's your best shot.

Posted by ClueChick at 9:09 AM in misc tips | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

A few weeks ago, I was contacted by the person who runs Anonymous Sex, which is, as you might imagine, a blog about anonymous sex. He contacted me to ask if I had any stories of my own encounters that I might like to share, and while I didn't, at the time, I soon thereafter wrote The View, which is probably one of the least explicit anonymous sex stories out there, but sue me, I'm shy about sharing details!

At any rate, Anonymous Sex has some very entertaining stories, as well as some useful information about anonymous sex, from safety to reasons that people do it, to stories they want to share. Surf on over and check it out!

Posted by ClueChick at 10:29 AM in other sites | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

In Older men, younger women and casual encounters, I wrote about my frustration with older men who ignore the age range I put in my ads. Sapiophile has called me on some of what I said, and I'll be posting in the next week or so about ways that a guy can reasonably respond to a woman's profile or post even if he doesn't fit all of her criteria. But today, I'd like to talk about the other most common thing that I specify and men ignore.

I don't do cheaters. I don't actually think that I, personally, have a significant moral debt in cases of cheating where I might be "the other woman", but I don't want to get involved in it for a variety of selfish reasons. First, if I'm fucking a cheater, I know I'll think less of him. Since, by definition, I want to be impressed by the people I'm fucking, and feel good about them, this is a bad thing. Second, I would feel dirty knowing that when we finished, he'd have to wash the smell of me off his hands before going home to his partner. Yuck. And third, I'd think less of myself for lowering my standards, and I therefore assume that he, too, would think less of me. True or not, this would impact my self-valuation, and I like to value myself highly, so this is not an exciting prospect to me.

Because of all this, I say up front in my ads and profiles that I won't bother with cheaters. I'm down with nonmonogamy in a variety of forms, but I am vastly uninterested in being involved in a "behind someone's back" sort of scene.

Nevertheless, I hear back from (cheating) married men a lot. This actually seems sleazy to me, because of my feelings about cheating in the first place. (Why would you want to lie to the person you've chosen to share your life with? The truth is, I know it's always more complicated than that, but I just can't get past that hurdle.) Lots of women don't specify one way or the other about the marriage issue, and it seems reasonable to me to approach them, but if a woman cares enough about it to mention it in her ad, it's simply bad form, in this case, to try to convince her. Unlike in the instances of, say, age or location, this one is a personal ethics call, and you ought to respect her desire to avoid that trap.

Posted by ClueChick at 8:25 AM in misc tips | Permalink | Comments (6) | TrackBacks (0)

In Confirming my expectations, I wrote about meeting up with a guy who I'd initially pegged as not a good match, and I found him to be... not a good match. In comments on that post, Cos asked if the opposite ever happens. The answer is yes, but rarely.

The truth is, it might have the potential to happen a lot. I could completely suck in my initial filtering process and be discarding men left and right who would simply blow the top of my head off with the heat of our sexual spark. Once I've decided that he's not that interesting to me, however, we're very, very unlikely to get to that point. I have a lot of inertia to overcome to get to the first meeting with almost any guy, and if I'm not pretty psyched about the potential, the odds of my actually doing so are quite slim. So, it probably happens more than I know, that I toss the good apples out with the bad in my early sorting.

Despite that, occasionally, a very determined fellow gets through, or creeps back into the fold, usually by sending me friendly, non-pushy emails or IMs that are hard to ignore but don't make me feel guilty about having nixed him. (If I feel guilty, I don't enjoy talking to the person who makes me feel that way, and I avoid the whole thing as much as possible.) Sometimes, my first take on these guys, as I reported last week, is right, and that's ok, but kind of a bummer for me, and, no doubt, a big bummer for them, since they've put a lot of time into bringing me around to the point of meeting them.

Other times, however, it turns out that he's fabulous, and by the end of our meeting, I can't remember why I decided not to meet him months ago in the first place. This hapened to me just a couple of days ago: I had initially spoken to this fellow, wow, last summer or fall, perhaps. We had some fun IM chats, but for some reason that I no longer recall, I decided that we weren't looking for the same thing. He was a bit younger, had a girlfriend (but she knows, and so it's all on the up-and-up, which is a must for me) and just didn't zing my "good match" meter. So, we fell out of contact.

Every once in a while, he would drop me a line on IM, we might have a fun chat, he'd point me to some hot erotica, and I'd tell him what I thought of it, but, still, I thought we weren't on the same page, and by then, I'd convinced myself that I wasn't his type at all, so there's no point in bothering. Men don't like older women, after all. (Yes, I know that's completely wrong; no one's internal workings are always right. Sue me.)

For the last couple of weeks, though, he's been pushing hard for us to meet, and some of those recent conversations have shown that we have a surprising amount in common. In fact, he's one of those rare guys who's my friend-type as well as, possibly, my fuck-type. So, okay, let's meet. And when we did... Hello! This man is very attractive, smart, charming, friendly. I'm actually a little shy (shocking, I know), so first meetings are tough for me, but with him, I felt at ease almost immediately, and I greatly enjoyed having a drink with him. I certainly plan to get together with him again, and I hope the feeling is mutual.

So, yes, sometimes I'm wrong. If ever anyone comes up with a good way to avoid this kind of time-wasting mistake, please, by all means, let me know about it.

Posted by ClueChick at 8:26 AM in cluechick encounters | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

In response to my current CL ad, titled "What I want:" I received this thoughtful email:

"may i fart on your face dirty smelly woman??????????///"

I just want to know how he knows I skipped my shower this morning!

Posted by ClueChick at 10:05 PM in actual responses | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

There are a lot of things to like about casual sex, as anyone who's had it knows. And one of those things, for me, is the proliferation of first kisses I get in this context. I suppose that I could just go around kissing the people I find attractive in day to day life, but I'm pretty sure that would be frowned upon at the office. "Hey, you're cute! *smooch* Oh... you're thinking about investing in the company...? Well... um... we're very friendly!"

In the context of casual hookups, it's not weird to kiss very early on in my acquaintance with someone, and there is simply nothing like a first kiss to give me a thrill. One of the things that often happens, and that I like very much, is that the guy will be very confident and chatty throughout our meeting, but as we arrive at the moment to kiss or not to kiss, he freezes up, unsure of what to do. For whatever reason, I find that moment's hesitation surprisingly endearing. On the other hand, I also like the guy who doesn't hesitate, who knows he wants to kiss me, and goes for it.

The truth is, if we've gotten to the point where I'm looking forward to kissing you, you're pretty well golden.

Kissing is a whole nother language, and it's a delight to learn another's tongue. Do you start soft and tentative, or do you dive in and get wet all at once? Do you close your eyes and savor the sensations, or do you like to keep your eyes open and watch the blurry outlines of your lover's face close to yours? Do you press up against your lover's body for a full-contact experience, or do you like to take it slow, just running your hand over her neck, down her side, resting at the curve of her hip?

Kissing is like eating out -- I like variety and different flavors, and I love the opportunity, in casual encounters, to try many different cuisines along the way.

Posted by ClueChick at 7:26 AM in cluechick encounters | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I've gotten myself into a little bind, and it's entirely because I haven't been listening to my good advice to other people. Let me explain:

There's this fellow who I've been fucking in a very, very casual way, for about 6 months. We've gotten together as much as a couple of times a month and as little as not at all for a couple of months -- it just depends on how our schedules and hormones line up. It's been fun.

We haven't seen each other since the holidays -- things were very busy during that time, of course, and then his job got busy, and then mine did. So we finally touched base last week long enough for him to say, "Hey, long time no see. Wanna fuck?" and me to respond, "This week isn't good, but next week, I'll drop you a line!"

Great, right?

Except, later that evening, I realized I don't want to fuck him again. He's been fun, but the truth is, he's not hugely creative, and he's not... well, he's really only average smart, which is enough to sustain my interest very briefly (if he manages to catch it in the first place). The truth is, he's only been around as long as he has because we see each other so infrequently.

But, of course, I told him last week that I'd be up for getting together again. So, now, I have to play the fickle woman card, which, of course, I hate. It would have been much better if I'd realized before that conversation that I was no longer interested. This, it would seem, is one of the down sides of the ultra-casual thing -- out of sight, out of mind. If I'd stopped to think about it, I'm sure I'd've realized before our conversation that he was no longer blowing my hair back. But why would I bother to think about it if I wasn't planning to make plans with him?

Yes, this is a clear lack of foresight. The end result?

I'm going to have to catch him on IM in the next couple of days and let him know that, much as I've enjoyed our hookups (and I have), it's no longer what I'm looking for, and good luck, have a great life. All of which would go better without last week's misleading conversation hinting at making plans. This is a good lesson for me to spare a thought for my idle boys out there in the field, not to let them languish too long, one way or the other.

Posted by ClueChick at 10:45 PM in cluechick encounters | Permalink | Comments (5) | TrackBacks (0)

I could write a whole blog on my pet peeves, but, instead, I started this blog. So you all will have to put up with the occasional peevish post. This is one of those.

I know there are a lot of older men out there looking for fun, and that's great. There are some older women, too, who are looking for the same sort of thing, and I look forward to being among them in another 10, 20 or 30 years, depending on what counts for old for you.

Something that bothers me, though, is older guys who try to pick me up. Oh, sure, I suppose there's no issue with a 50 year old fellow trying his luck with me, but all of my ads or profiles say my age (I was 28 when I started posting ads to CL, now I'm 29), and they all specify that I want to hook up with someone around my own age. And despite my clear specification, it's not uncommon for me to get a somewhat sheepish response from guys 15 years my senior talking about how young they are at heart, and if only I would give them a chance, I'd find older men to be quite fantastic.

Now, there are two problems, here: First, it always annoys me when someone knows he doesn't fit my criteria but decides that I probably don't really mean it, whatever "it" may be. "I smoke, but only between bouts of lovemaking. That doesn't matter, right?" Or, "You said you like to use condoms, but what if I pull out before I come?" Given the short length of most ads, the things that a person bothers to put in are likely to be things that are important to him or her, and worth acknowledging. The second, thing, though, about the older guys, is that it's such a pattern. I don't actually get a lot of men trying to get me to change my mind about what I'm looking for. For example, I don't have loads of email from married men saying, "Won't you make an exception for me, pleeeease?" I do, however, have loads of such email from older men.

I know that lots of older men are fantastic in bed, and I'm closing off lots of opportunities to sleep with men who know what they're doing with a woman's body. And I'm not saying no to them because I don't like grey hair (I do, actually, especially that salt-and-pepper thing guys with really dark hair get) or find older men unattractive. I could go into my various reasons for wanting to be with men my age, but the point is, that's what I want, and that's what I'm posting about. And I still get about 40% of my responses from men who are at least 13 years older than I am.

This makes me wonder: Can these men read? Do they care what their partner wants? Would they pay attention to other things I say are important to me? Can they not get a hot woman their own age? Have they bought into the obnoxious beauty myths of our culture that say that women aren't hot after 40?

They probably can pick up lots of women my age, but I'm not one of them, and that's why I'm clear in my ads that that's not what I'm looking for. That doesn't seem to stop them from trying, though.

Posted by ClueChick at 8:06 AM in actual responses | Permalink | Comments (9) | TrackBacks (0)

I was going to post an interesting bit on age and dating, but I'm kinda tired, so instead, I'm going the lazy way, and opening this up for comments or emails. If there's something you'd like me to address in the next couple of weeks, drop me a note, and I'll see if I don't have some thoughts about it. (Some of you have already done this. Those posts are upcoming!)

Posted by ClueChick at 10:58 PM in questions for the audience | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (0)

On Monday's post regarding why I don't post my photograph, otwisted commented:

Are you sure they want your picture for those reasons?

Even though you are 'preaching the truth', I'm imagining that it would be easier to dismiss it as 'sour grape opinions' if they were coming from someone who is not visually appealing to them.

To which I'd like to say a few words. First, I do like to give my readers the benefit of the doubt (unlike people who respond to my ad, who usually see the sharper side of the axe), so naturally I'm going to think that they think I must be gorgeous and fabulous (although I maintain that I'm basically just average attractive -- to some people's taste and not others).

But, if you're the kind of person who's going to weight advice based on the looks of the person giving it, you should picture me as the most unattractive person you can imagine. You should imagine I look just as ugly as ugly can be, with teeth falling out and hair all over the place and whatever else isn't hot to you. Because if you're the kind of person for whom advice is only worth following if it comes from someone whose looks match some individual standard, then you're the kind of person who I don't really want to help, and I hope you shove off.

Posted by ClueChick at 8:43 AM in Administrativa | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

I don't mix altered states with casual hookups. In other words, when I'm drinking, I don't pick up fuckbuddies, online or in person, and when I'm hunting, I don't drink. I don't use drugs at all, but if I did, the same rules would apply. (I'm not against recreational drug use; in fact, I'm generally in favor of it. I'm just a control freak who likes to keep her wits about her and doesn't trust chemicals or the people who sell them.)

A lot of people like to use alcohol or other drugs to relax themselves for a hookup, or to heighten sensations, or to make it more exciting. I have nothing against this, but I also don't necessarily advise it. Here's why:

In general, I try not to regret things I do in my life. I approach this in a two-pronged way: First, I try to make choices that I won't regret afterwards, and second, once I make a choice, I try to frame it in a way that it's a positive thing. Part of this means that I don't decide who I'm going to fuck while I'm drinking, especially because I know I'm a cheap date, and drinking makes me horny. One glass of wine and I'll be edging my chair close to yours. Two glasses and I'll be on your lap. This can be fun, for sure, when I've already fucked a guy, but it doesn't make for the most clear-headed decision-making if I'm trying to figure out if I want to fuck him in the first place.

The cultural acceptance of the drunken hookup is so well-established that even someone as sheltered from the mainstream as myself is aware of the jokes about how if your options aren't looking so good, you should have another drink. Maybe I'm just picky, but I'd rather feel as good about having someone in my bed when I wake up as when I bring them home.

I don't mind if my date drinks, though I am likely to take it personally if he gets snockered before we head to bed. Not to mention, a completely drunk lover is, generally, a lazy lover. Where's the fun in that?

You all know where your limits are, and if you don't, you should. So only you can say what level of high is okay for you. But if you have to get high to have fun with someone new, I'd say that's worth examining a little more closely, and you certainly won't be getting into bed with me.

Posted by ClueChick at 5:08 PM in misc tips | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

If you're having casual sex, you ought to be up to date on the health risks involved in recreational sex. If you're not paying attention to your health and safety, you're being dumb. Obviously, anyone who wants to be dumb can do that, but... well, it speaks for itself.

I'm surprised how many people looking online for hookups are looking for unprotected sex. This strikes me as quite absurd, but, hey, the great thing about being an adult is you get to make your own stupid choices.

Personally, I don't practice the safest sex out there. I don't use latex gloves, and I only use latex for oral sex some of the time, depending on my partner. I know these are risky behaviors, and I'm willing to take those risks. I talk about the risks with my partners so they can make their own informed choices, too.

It's your responsibility, as someone who has sex, in whatever context, to figure out what risks you're willing to take, and to be open about that with the people you play with. It's also your responsibility to share your safer sex practices with your partners, and to answer whatever questions they have in a forthright way.

I'm obviously not against engaging in risky behavior, but I'm not impressed by anyone who does so out of ignorance and stupidity rather than clearly-considered choice.

Posted by ClueChick at 9:48 AM in misc tips | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I have gotten a number of requests for my picture, or for me to post a picture on the blog, or to make an exception and send my picture just to you because you like to see what the person whose writing you're reading looks like.

I'm afraid that the answer to all of these questions is no.

You may have noticed that the theme of this blog is not necessarily something that one would want, say, one's parents or bosses to identify as coming from you. For all I know, my parents or bosses are reading this blog and if you're a parent or a boss of a 29 year-old woman with strong opinions, you never know if I might be someone you know better than you think! (Hi, Mom! Hi, Dad! Hi, Boss!)

And that's not even to mention if I ever have kids and this sort of thing is archived somewhere that they stumble upon it! "Sure, kids, not only did I fuck loads of strangers, but I bragged about it on the internet! No, of course I don't mind if you take the keys to the car!" (Actually, I probably would have that conversation with them, anyway, but there's no need to have this sneak up and bite me on the ass when I'm least expecting it.)

I'm sure you, too, can understand the importance of a certain level of anonymity here. But beyond the "this seems like a good idea," aspect of it, I also like the anywomanness of it. I like the idea that men could be wondering to themselves, on the way to a hookup, "Could this woman be ClueChick?" or picturing someone they know writing this blog. The point is that I'm just representing a whole lot of smart, discerning 20- and 30-something women who like to go out and have casual sex, so it's not actually that important who I am.

And my standard reply to men who want my picture, is to suggest you imagine me looking like your favorite porn star, celebrity, or crush. Or just make up what I look like. Because, after all, you want me for my words, not my body. Isn't that novel?

Posted by ClueChick at 7:56 PM in Administrativa | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (0)

Let's say you're a casual sex god(dess) and you have people lined up out the door for a chance to get you into bed. Or, perhaps more realistically, just that you have a couple of people who you fuck around with or a regular person and a couple of fuckbuddies. Or, you're polyamorous and have a steady partner but you also like to get some on the side (I'm not blogging on polyamory, so if you're not up on what it is, just fucking google it.) What do you tell your lovers about one another?

There are a couple of schools of thought on this: There's the, "It's casual so no one has to know anything," option. In this take on things, you basically tell people only what you think they need to know and you don't volunteer anything else. Personally, I suck at this, because I hate trying to figure out what people need to know, and I'm basically an open-book kind of person. (You may have noticed.) It doesn't occur to me not to talk about one lover with the next, especially if someone asks a question like, "So, how's the internet sex scene going for you?"

Another option, therefore, is the, "Everyone knows everything," approach. This is easy as pie, because you don't have to worry, "Did I tell Joe about Ed, or is it going to be weird for me to talk about that fun thing we did that I'd like to try again?" On the other hand, it turns out some people don't want to know everything that you're doing with other partners.

Because I'm lazy, and I hate making decisions for other people, my way of handling the question of what to tell my lovers about each other is to ask them: "Will it weird you out if I talk about my other lovers with you?" I explain that my natural inclination is to be totally open about it, that it doesn't strike me as weird when they talk about their other lovers, and that, in fact, I probably want to know, either for safer sex reasons or for my own lascivious imagination. (Picturing my lover fucking someone else is almost as good as an actual threesome! Okay, maybe not that good, but I like it, anyway.)

If someone doesn't want to hear about my other encounters, that's fine, and I can generally rein myself in, but the job then falls to him not to ask me any questions that might elicit information he doesn't want. My theory on questions is that once you ask them, you're going to get a straight up answer, like it or not. So don't ask a question if you don't want the answer.

I don't think there's a hard-and-fast rule about what you reveal or not, but you need to figure out for yourself what you think. If you're picking up people on the internet, you can probably assume you're not the only one they're seeing. Think about what you want to know, and what you're willing to share with them. Be clear about both of these things, and if you change your mind later, be clear about that, too.

Posted by ClueChick at 8:44 AM in misc tips | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

I have, in front of me, a photograph that a man sent me in hopes that I would want to sleep with him through the sheer power of his physical beauty. How can I tell? He didn't write anything in his email. He just sent me a picture. I suppose he's going on the theory that a picture is worth a thousand words. His mistake, however, is that if he just sends me a photo, I'm the one who gets to pick the thousand words.

I'm going to start with: "drunk", "staggering" and "bad judgment".

Allow me to describe this picture to you:

It's an average-looking guy, a little bit chunky, but in a "I still play rugby with my pals" kind of way. He has a terrible haircut, with his stringy, light brown hair falling into his eyes, but not in an artful and sexy way so much as if to say he hasn't gotten his hair cut recently. His cheeks are brightly flushed, and his eyes are narrowed to squinty little specks. He has half a glass of beer tottering precariously in one hand while, with the other hand, he is flipping off the camera.

His body tells me that he's too drunk to do much more than lean forward and rest his elbows on his knees, and the middle finger extended to the camera's eye is clearly a stretch, as he looks extremely unbalanced by the effort.

This is a real photograph that I received in response to one of my ads, and the only good thing I have to say about it is that he's wearing pants. I go on the theory that the only time a guy should flip me off, if at all, is at the end of our relationship. So I took this photograph to indicate that he wanted a very brief relationship: He writes an email, I read it, he flips me off (via the photo), I hit delete.

I have to admire, if nothing else, his efficiency.

Posted by ClueChick at 9:21 AM in snarky | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

A lot of the photos I get were clearly taken when the subject is inebriated. This strikes me as okay, especially if you're a party guy, since you're telling your prospective dates something about yourself with your photo. As long as you don't have that slack-jawed, empty-eyed look of someone who's about to make a break for the bathroom, or, in case of a line, the nearest planter, drunk photos are fine. In some cases, they're better than fine, because there's a lot of entertainment to be had with a picture of a strange guy singing karaoke with another guy in a plush turtle suit (don't ask; I didn't).

One thing, however, that I advise against, is the photo of you plus some random chick. Especially if you've done that goofy black-bar-over-her-eyes thing. If you have the technology to make her look like a Glamour "don't", you have the technology to take her out of the picture entirely. If you have your arm around her like she's your girlfriend, it's just kind of weird to send that to a potential fuckbuddy. If she has a black bar over her eyes in a picture of her sucking your cock, not only do I think it's weird, I think you're an asshole to boot.

The best thing to do, if you can, is to have a good picture of yourself without anyone else in it. If you can't do that, you should cut as much of the other person or people (if they're recognizable) out of the picture as possible while still giving a reasonable impression of you. Whiting out the other person's face, or just her eyes, is nothing more than weird. Don't bother.

I'm all for openness in relationships, and I'm no stickler for monogamy, so I'm not saying this because sending a picture of yourself with a woman will make you look like you're cheating or anything like that. Rather, it makes you look like you don't care about the privacy of this chick whose picture you're sending out to strangers.

Also, I don't like it if she's prettier than I am. Call me shallow and insecure, but I hate to feel like I don't measure up. If I think you're going to ding me because I'm not a 10 (and I'm not), I probably won't bother being in touch with you.

Think about what you're saying with your picture. Are you saying, "I will use photographs of you without your permission in the future," or "I look good when I'm three sheets to the wind," or "I fucked this girl before you, don't you feel special?" Personally, I suggest the message should focus, rather, on you, and it should say, "I'm attractive, well-groomed, and will give you a great orgasm if you just give me the chance."

Posted by ClueChick at 8:37 AM in misc tips | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

I was going to talk about politics again tonight, but then I decided it was time for something a little more fun.

What you all don't know about me is that I haven't always been unrepentantly slutty. In fact, for many years, I was the very picture of modesty and so-called proper behavior. Even through most of college, I wasn't interested in dating the sorts of prospects I had, so... I didn't. I didn't start having sex until my 20s, and as of a year ago, I had slept with a grand total of four people (unless you count fisting, in which case, five).

So, what brought me to my current status as a vocal proclaimer of casual sex?

I had, a couple of months prior, broken up with a long-term boyfriend, and I had absolutely no desire to get involved in a serious way with anyone new. I had always figured that I just wasn't cut out for casual sex, and I was fine with that. But one slow night at home, I logged in on OkCupid and found a flirtatious note from a local guy. I responded in kind, and our exchange turned rather steamy. We used the IM feature on OkC for a while, then moved to AIM, making suggestive comments all the while.

Well, what do you know, but this flirtation got me rather worked up, and as chance would have it, Mr. Flirtation lived just a few blocks from me. With the raucous encouragement of some of my friends (who were in on the whole transaction in another chat window), I decided to go for it. After all, if it turned out badly, then I'd know for sure casual sex wasn't for me, and at least I might have some fun in learning the lesson.

So, he came over, we had a fairly fun, naughty time, and he left. I didn't feel dirty. I didn't feel regretful. I didn't feel any of those things that I thought I might. In fact, I felt downright smug.

Never having done such a thing before, I didn't know the post-hookup etiquette. I dropped him a note saying thanks, and I didn't hear back from him. At first, this made me grumpy, but even that grumpiness wasn't enough to sour me on the experience. And, in the end, I can look back and say that it's good that it didn't turn into a regular thing. He was ok, but not great, and looking back, I think this conversation sums up just how much we had in common:

[Entering my room:]
Him: Wow, you have a lot of books.
Me: Uhh. I guess I do. [I don't actually think I have that many books, but ok.]
Him: Have you read them all?
Me: ...
Him: *starts to take off my shirt*
Me: *pretends we didn't have that conversation*

Nevertheless, I'm grateful to him for not being an axe murderer or completely skeevy or any number of other things that could well have turned me off casual sex forever. And the rest, as they say, has been a really good fucking year.

Posted by ClueChick at 7:26 PM in cluechick encounters | Permalink | Comments (5) | TrackBacks (0)

You all may remember that a couple of weekends ago, I was planning to meet up with a fellow I'd been emailing with for quite some time. Well, we did meet, and here's what I've learned:

I know what I want. And just because a guy sticks around and is persistent doesn't mean that my initial evaluation that we're not a good match, even for casual play, is wrong. It may mean that he's a very nice guy, ultra patient, not resorting to high-pressure or guilt trips, and these are all good things.

Now, my biggest concern, before meeting him, was that he was having a dual-image problem, having trouble combining my inner good girl and my inner slut. Or maybe that's my outer slut. I get confused. At any rate, that didn't come up at all; I don't know if it's just 'cause we were in pretty unambiguous let's-see-how-this-goes territory, or if I was misreading him. I was glad not to run up against that, though, as the good girl/bad girl dichotomy is one of my pet peeves.

Instead, what happened is that things just fell flat. It wasn't awful, but where I look for intensity, for the heat to rise up off my body until I want to shimmy out of my clothes and fling him on the floor (or have him fling me, depending on my mood). With this guy, it was entirely pleasant. The conversation was nice. The interaction was nice. He was nice. But there was no spark.

And this is what I had predicted last summer when we started corresponding. So, the lesson is, my early judgments can be right. I sometimes worry that I make inappropriately snap decisions, and this fellow helped me by showing me that in at least some cases, my judgment calls are right on.

Posted by ClueChick at 8:45 AM in cluechick encounters | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (0)

I was recently talking to a friend of mine about a man she'd been seeing. They'd been dating fairly regularly before they had a spectacularly ugly breakup, and in the months since they broke up, it's come to light that he was trying to seduce several other women (in our social circle, no less) into his bed. You all know how I feel about cheating, right? So I don't need to go on about that. Instead, what I want to talk about is something she said while talking about this. She said, "I know it's awful of him, but at the same time, he just can't help it. He's a guy."

Hold up. What??

It's this kind of bullshit that keeps us from social advancement together, because let me tell you, there's no "war of the sexes." We all win, or we all lose. And when we think that guys can't help themselves from being evil bastards, we do no one any favors. Here's why:

First, when women expect men to act like assholes, we set ourselves up to have shitty partners. Have you ever had a shitty partner? Not much fun, was it? Thus, shitty partners are bad.

Second, when men get the pass on bad behavior, it encourages other men to behave badly, which, when they're good guys, bums them out. This leads to the problem of nice guys feeling like they finish last, and that blows.

Third, if we can expect nothing more than bad behavior from men, we're basically saying that they suck. "Oh, sure, I'd rather have a partner who respects me, but what can I expect? He's a bottom-feeder guy."

People, don't excuse bad behavior in anyone. It may be forgivable, but it's not excusable.

Women, don't put up with bullshit. Why would you even want to?

Men, you don't suck (except for that one sweet spot just a little to the left... yeah, there...) and I expect more of you. Don't disappoint me.

Posted by ClueChick at 5:55 PM in snarky | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (0)

As the saying goes: I'm kinky; you're perverted.

I'm always fascinated by the variety in perceptions from one person to the next. This is true in all settings; it just happens to spring into relief online, where people are more likely to spell out what it is they want, what they think, how things look to them. You can't tell of the woman you're considering propositioning in the grocery store checkout line is into wearing stockings or not, if the guy at the bank is going to go for being tied up, or what have you. And, obviously, depending on who you spend time with, any given activity may or may not jump out as weird to you.

For example, in one of my ads, I said something about looking for "kinky fun". One poor fellow responded that he was into "BJ/HJ/FJ ... kinky, huh?" I, of course, thought that this must be a different set of activities than I thought, because, surely no one is still thinking that blowjobs are kinky? So, I responded, looking for clarification. Upon clarification that, yes, indeed, he did mean blowjob/handjob/footjob. Poor guy.

Just about any wacky thing you can imagine, you can find online. In fact, lots of wacky things I can't imagine are to be found online. But even without dredging the depths for the strangest or most unusual sexual preference, there's lots of room for confusion. Is bondage kinky? It's certainly lost its cache if major hotels are providing cuffs as an option on the room service menu.

Kinky is obviously in the eye of the beholder. If you're looking for something specific, spell it out. And if you want some fun, leave it open-ended, because you're bound to get some surprising responses.

Posted by ClueChick at 7:46 AM in misc tips | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

For you real women... - m4w - 27

if you're not on here just to see how many guys you can attract and you just want to roll in the sheets without having to wade through a lot of proove-that-you're-good-enough bullshit, then e-mail me a photo and i'll do the same. as long as you're not huge or a transexual, i'll probably be willing to hook up with you.

Because I just love it when a guy is willing to hook up with me.

Posted by ClueChick at 8:12 PM in real ads | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Ah, Valentine's Day. It is a day of joy, trauma, drama and crushed hopes for lovers and singles everywhere. Although it is traditionally most celebrated by romantically involved couples, and I am neither romantic nor involved, as a woman writing a blog about relationships, I could hardly let this opportunity pass me by, right?

First, I hope all of you, my beloved readers, who are hoping to get laid today, do, in fact, get laid. And if you're into all the kinky Valentine's Day shit like flowers and chocolates, I hope you get that, too. (Although, on a political note, if you get flowers, I hope they're organically grown or Veriflora certified, and if you get chocolate, I'm sure it'll be fairly traded. I won't wish diamonds on anyone, since they're overpriced, shiny, meaningless trinkets with a filthy political past and present, and I know none of you want that karmic debt flashing from some gaudy piece of jewelry that you'll only rarely wear out of the house, anyway.)

With that out of the way, I further hope that you all enjoy your day free of social obligations or pressure, enjoying your current relationship state -- whether single, partnered, slutty, celibate, busy or bored. I hope that you have at least one fabulous orgasm, either alone or with a friend. I hope you enjoy your dinner out, or your movie, or your romantic tryst, or your drunken stupor or a day of ignoring the hype.

And, most of all, I hope that you are celebrating today, and every day, by finding and making your own path to happiness, regardless of what Hallmark tells you to do.

Posted by ClueChick at 7:29 AM in snarky | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

I'm moving to New York. All the best ads from men come from there. To wit:

I just solved the Riemann Hypothesis! - m4ww - 26

For those of you that don't know math, this is a really big deal.

To celebrate, I think I deserve a threesome tonight with two hot girls.

So, if you're interested--send me an e-mail. I'm cute, nice, and--obviously--really fucking smart.

(If you're in NYC and a big brain turns you on, you can email him.)

I have not seen his proof, so I make no guarantees, but at the very least, he's obviously confident and funny.

(Who said you can't use mad math skillz to pick people up?)

Posted by ClueChick at 6:50 PM in real ads | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

One of the very most common questions I get is from men who are in a (closed) marriage or relationship and want my advice on how they can make themselves more attractive to women online. My answer has two parts:

First, all of the advice I give applies to everyone; what makes a single guy attractive -- smarts, competence, attention to detail, sincerity -- are the same things that make a partnered guy attractive. So, there's no call, in my mind, for specialized advice for cheaters.

Second, although I reserve judgement from any individual case of cheating -- I know that each case is likely to be more complicated than I can or would imagine -- I'm against cheating. I don't see it as an honest and healthy way of moving through life, and I think you all know how I feel about honesty. I don't understand why one would want to share one's life with someone with whom you can't share the major ups and downs in your life. And bedroom fun, relational fun, falls into that category for me. Thus, I can't wrap my head around cheating. And I will not, therefore, tailor specialized advice for cheaters to improve their odds.

The one thing I will say is this: If you're cheating, have the integrity to be open about that to your potential paramours. This will decrease your odds, but it will make you less of a scumball, because a woman who doesn't want to get involved in a cheating situation shouldn't end up there by way of trickery. Enough people see it as not-a-big-deal that you should be catching fish in that pond and letting the rest of us make our own choices with regards to this ethical line.

Posted by ClueChick at 10:06 AM in Q&A | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

I've been playing with this woman for a few months. It's been fine, but has run its course. What's the best way to end it?

I spend a lot of time talking about the challenges of getting a casual encounter or relationship going, but there's another issue that, apparently, comes up from time to time. What do you do when you have a regular, ongoing thing that you're ready to end? It's casual, so it's not really a breakup per se, and in many casual arrangements, there's no regular date to be broken, but, rather, no new date to be made.

Yes, you can end a casual thing by just dropping it. One of my guys and I make a date every month or two, by IM, and if it went several months without any contact, it wouldn't particularly impact my day to day life. But it would have the unsatisfying effect of being unclear. Is it over, or are we both too busy? This can also leave the other person in the uncomfortable position of getting in touch with you to arrange a date, not realizing that you're done, and then you'll have to have the conversation about it, anyway.

Better to let them know when you've made the decision. Unlike with a more committed romantic relationship, where I would say that breaking up over the phone or via IM would be tacky at best, in a casual engagement, it's fine to end things in the same way that you do most of your date arranging. Do you arrange things over the phone? Give her a call. If you make dates on IM or in email, drop him a line that way.

It's not a big deal, as long as you've both been clear about where things are, and that you have no plans to make it a long term thing, and it's only good form to be clear at the end as well as during. Not to mention, the next person you try to pick up might be a friend of hers, in which case, you're more likely to get somewhere if she knows you're not a loser at the end of things.

Posted by ClueChick at 5:28 PM in Q&A | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I love the online pickup scene. I'm sure that's obvious to all of you, my attentive readers. I'm shy in person, so I wouldn't get nearly so much action if I had to limit myself to bars and clubs and the like. Also, I (and this is obviously a benefit of being a woman in the scene) can set up an ad and then sort through responses in the comfort of my living room, which is both less expensive and more relaxing and low-key than going to a public venue to meet people.

But there's something missing in the online dance, and it's one of the advantages of meeting up for coffee or lunch for the first date: Face to face flirtation.

I love flirting. I like the shy smiles, the blushes, the exquisite extended eye contact, the brush of hands, the bump of feet under the table... And I like it when these things are paired with uncertainty, with that flutter in my stomach, with the shiver of anticipatory questioning: Will we or won't we?

By laying so much groundwork via email and chat, some of that twitter is muffled in online pickups. The tradeoff is, for the most part, worth it to me, and to many people online, but as an intensity junky, I do sometimes miss that frisson, especially if I've not been able to do much in the way of in-person flirting. When that happens, I might agree to meet someone earlier than I otherwise might, but with more of the "what will happen?" up in the air, and that reminds me that sometimes it's good just to jump in and see how it goes.

Posted by ClueChick at 10:17 AM in cluechick encounters | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Some people have noticed that I'm a bit of a snob. I snark the net-speak emails I get that replace "you are" with "u r" and I blithely ignore the emails that don't meet my high standards. Aren't there women out there on the net who are less particular in the ways of intellectual seduction? Shouldn't I cut guys a little more slack?

The answer to the first question is: Yes, absolutely. There are millions upon millions of women in the US -- hell, just on my side of the Mississippi and Mason-Dixon line -- who are less fussy than I am, especially about things like coherent sentences and good grammar. Just because I mock these things in conversations with my friends, family, and strangers on the internet doesn't mean that I'm the last word on them. If you'd rather fuck someone who doesn't care about such things, by all means, go for it!

The answer to the second question is: Heh.

The longer answer is also a bit more complicated: I have high expectations, and I'm okay with that. It limits my field, but what's the point in playing in a field you don't enjoy? That said, if I get a great, articulate email from someone who confuses "your" and "you're" or who doesn't capitalize at the beginning of sentences, or what have you, I'm not likely to rule him out for orthographical errors. Sure, I may have doubts that wouldn't exist with someone whose every email is letter-perfect, but I care more about the content than the dressing. It's just easier to appreciate the content when the dressing isn't actively distracting me.

I won't, however, cut anyone any slack on the content piece. You've got to engage my mind before you can even consider engaging my body, and online, the way to do that is through your email. No, you don't have to spell everything perfectly, but you damn well better impress me with what you've got behind those typos.

Posted by ClueChick at 11:05 AM in misc tips | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

When I get an email from a short guy, even one that's really not up to par, I nearly always want to write him back, whether he sounds like a good match for me or not, to say how much I like short guys. It's not that I specifically like short guys more than tall guys -- I like tall guys quite a lot -- it's just that I don't sort on height, which, obviously, lots of women do, and I always want to give the short guys out there a boost.

I usually don't do this, because I have this silly little internal filtering mechanism that tells me who I'm allowed to respond to or not. Yes, I know, it's my own filter and if I break other people's rules, I sure as hell ought to be willing to break my own, but that's a discussion for another day. At any rate, my internal filter tells me things like, "You can't respond to that guy with the hot photo because his email blows, and you'll get depressed about it later if you do," or "This guy is younger than you usually go for, but he writes incredibly good email, so you might as well flex on this one." You can see that my filter really focuses on internals.

So my filter tells me, more or less entirely based on someone's writing, who I'm allowed to respond to. And if a guy writes an email that's not up to par, I don't respond. Okay, good enough. The problem comes in because there are categories of men that I know get a lot of rejection for something that's not the reason I'm rejecting them, and I always wish I could send them a note saying, "Hey, your email sucked. I'd totally blow you if you turned me on with your writing, even though you're only 5'5"."

The truth is, there's a lot of fun to be had with a guy who's approximately my height. I have an ex who was more than a foot taller than I am, and I had to stand on a step to kiss him without his help (he was usually quite obliging with the stooping down, but I know he's always happy to meet a woman for whom he doesn't have to stoop), and that had its fun, but also its awkwardness. And there's a little something fun about things lining up just so when I'm standing around smooching on a guy.

So rather than write email to each short-but-still-not-email-sexy guys who sends me mail, I thought I'd write this. Short guys: you're wicked fun. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise. And to my fellow chicks: get over the height thing. There's a lot of fun to be had at all heights.

Posted by ClueChick at 7:44 AM in misc tips | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBacks (0)

A brilliant and incisive reader of one of my ads wrote:

prove u r a woman

To which I responded first with laughter, then with a glass of scotch. Now I'm ready to write about it.

How the hell do you expect me to prove anything online? Sure, I can send you a picture, but, um, do you really think that is proof? If so, you obviously don't know the ease with which someone can take an image file from just about anywhere and pass it off as him or herself. Please. Maybe if I respond from an email address that has a female name attached? Because for sure no one's ever used a fake name on an email address before, nuh uh.

Maybe the curvy shape my pixels take in forming words will be proof positive. Or they show up pink on your screen? Criminy.

Even a phone conversation wouldn't prove anything, as I could be a man adept at vocal adaptation. And that's assuming I'd be willing to give my phone number to such a literate skeptic as usually demands such proof, which is, needless to say, extremely unlikely.

If you think someone online is a man posing as a woman, and you actually hope to uncover it, demanding proof isn't likely to do it, either. But if your reader actually is a woman, you can bet that she's not going to bother wasting her time in such a ridiculous endeavor as proving herself to you.

Posted by ClueChick at 6:12 PM in actual responses | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (0)

This one seems obvious to me, but, like so many things that seem obvious, it turns out not to be. In fact, I've written about it before, but I just got a really awful picture, so I'm inspired again.

First, your photo should be recent, and it should reflect, more or less, how you currently look. To the guy who sends me a picture of himself and says, "But I've lost 100 pounds since then!" -- you might as well not send me a picture, because 100 pounds makes a big difference, so I still have no idea what you look like, but if I'm someone who doesn't like fat guys, I now think you're one.

Second, your photo should show you clearly. I got a picture last week that was so dark that the guy looked like a shadowy, hunchbacked monster. He might have had a beard, or long hair, or been black, but I couldn't tell. Another popular one is the picture from afar. Again, this doesn't help me.

Third, your photo should not focus on your dick. I know that's where you're going to want me to lavish my attentions once we meet, but just pretend for a moment, if you would, that I care about more than that.

I like a photo that shows a man's face clearly, and gives me a sense of his build, though it doesn't have to be a full body picture. I happen to care more about how a person carries himself than what shape his body is, but that carriage is hard to capture in pictures. I've occasionally received an action shot -- him playing a sport or walking or dancing or what have you -- and I tend to like those for that reason, though they often don't have a clear picture of his face, so if that's the case, two pictures isn't a bad idea.

Posted by ClueChick at 7:49 AM in Q&A | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I adore Dan Savage, and his advice column, Savage Love, is an inspiration for me, though I have a long way to go before I can even fantasize about being in his league. So, this evening, I'd like to point you all to an excellent (and long) interview with him, which you can find here, at the A.V. Club, including this:

You wonder why straight guys are all so endlessly perverse. Like I said earlier, all the poo-eaters are guys. And it's just because there's so much more pressure laid on men about male sexuality that just squeezes out in weird, perverse ways. It's kind of tragic. It's also tragic that straight guys have so little access to sex ... And it just put complete responsibility for sex on the men in those relationships. And men do sort of bear all responsibility—whatever's going wrong is completely their fault, women are always the victims. I just think there's no respect for male sexuality in this empathy culture that's shaped by and defined by a female perspective on relationships and emotions.

Posted by ClueChick at 7:35 PM in hurdles , other sites | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

The thing about any flirtation techniques I tell you about is that they only work if they're working. That is, flirtation is a game, and it only moves if both people are playing. So when you're flirting, it's essential that you be paying attention to her cues and back off if she's not playing the same game you are.

There's no guarantee, and there's nothing as effective as a bucket of cold water as someone who moves the flirtation too fast or clumsily. By paying attention, if she hits the brakes, you can, rather than plowing into her bumper, slow down, too, and figure out where you're going.

Sometimes, I'll be flirting with a guy online, and I'll start to get bored with where things are -- this happened recently with a fellow with whom I started a very explicit email exchange. I offered a scenario and asked what he'd do, and he responded with the implication that if I were to show up at his office in that attire, he'd want a blow job. Okay, cool. So I offered a few more lines of what might happen and then passed the ball back to him... and he commented that he wanted to hear more about the blowjob I'd be giving him. Now, I was writing about something I love doing, so that's all well and good, but, hello, dull. That's like actually giving a guy head and encouraging him to put his hands on my breasts, only to find a moment later that he has returned to wanking himself while I suck him off. Yawn. So I tried to steer things in a more interesting direction and, again, that fell flat.

He was so focused on his path tha