where I begin to lie

It was the second question he asked. I recently went out with someone I met on an online dating site. I called the night before our date to chat, and right away he said:

"Oh, a Utah number." (okay, who has a land line with regular caller ID these days?!)

"Yeah, I haven't lived there in 5 years, but it's such a pain to change your number."

"Oh so, you grew up in Utah?"

"Yeah"

"Did you grow up Mormon?"

He was easy to talk to and like all first dates we each shared a bit about our lives.
Sure, I grew up in Utah, yes, I grew up Mormon. He was interested and fascinated and we had a great time.

The next night we met at a wine bar. He was cute and there was definitely a spark. I found myself talking easily to him and answering his questions about my background. He seemed genuinely impressed as I told him how I had grown up Mormon but that I had left when I realized it didn't work for me. Questions about my religious background always seem so innocuous at first, and I don't realize how strange they think I am until it's too late and I've already given too much away. Somehow I mentioned that I hadn't tried alcohol til I was 30 (why, why do I say these things?!). Being more savvy than many of my dates, the wheels started turning in his head.

"So if you were 30 when you tried alcohol...then you probably waited a long time for other things..."

Without verbally asking the question, but asking it with his eyes, I knew he was talking about the first time I had sex. I laughed it off, though these conversations always make me uncomfortable. I dodged the question and told him it wasn't a first date conversation. He told me a little bit about a girl he had dated who was in her early thirties and was still a virgin but didn't want to be anymore. He told her that she should find a friend, someone she was comfortable with to try that with, but that he was too old for that and that was too much pressure on him. I've heard virtually the same thing from many guys. Whether you're a virgin or just not very experienced, most guys don't want to deal with the baggage they assume you have.

I don't think it's the strange beliefs I used to hold that men are uncomfortable with. I fit pretty well into the secular, liberal world I live in. I think it's the perceived (and sometimes real) lack of shared experience that guys don't know what do with. That what I was doing in my twenties (or not doing) is different from what other people were doing in their twenties. It must be difficult to relate to. I don't usually have this problem talking with women, which makes me think that for men, it's primarily about sexual experience.

It makes me angry because in church I learned how sex was something to stay away from and that being pure and untouched is a good thing. I followed this and my twenties were sexless and experience-less. Now I find that the biggest liability of all. Who knew that I would have been in a better position if I had started having sex in high school?

I believe in honesty and transparency. Even more so since I left the church. But it is getting me nowhere in the dating realm. I'm tired of answering questions when the answers are never okay, and I'm tired of feeling like a circus freak. I think that I may try a new experiment. Next time I'm asked if I grew up Mormon, the answer is no. And hopefully I'm an interesting enough person without that story. Because I don't think I can keep telling it much longer.

What if my instincts are totally wrong?

One of the biggest lessons I learned in leaving the Mormon church was that of trusting myself, trusting my gut instincts about things.
But I find when it comes to love and dating, my instincts do not serve me well. Well, maybe they do in some ways, but they also keep me alone.
One answer is to buy one of those "how to get, or keep, or pleasure a man," blah blah blah. But I find they are so full of traditional gender stereotypes that I just can't stand to read it, much less follow it.
The kind of advice that I actually believe is typically in the vein of "be yourself, do what comes naturally, blah blah blah." But that never works for me either. I do a pretty damn good job of being myself and doing what comes naturally, and I naturally end up alone.

Hmm...any advice that is neither of these options?

I wouldn't mind home teachers right about now...

I'm missing being Mormon a little bit right now. But not for any deep reasons of Christmas wistfulness or anything. I have to move (AGAIN) next week, and it would be really nice if I could just call my home teachers and get a bunch of people to help out. Instead I'm stuck begging the few people who will be in town over the holidays or hiring movers. Oh well, I guess even if I have to hire people it will be less than tithing would have been...

Capitalism, A Love Story

I saw Capitalism, A Love Story this weekend. There were a lot of things in the film that were shocking and depressing about unfettered capitalism. It made me outraged on so many levels, to see so much corruption and such an inherently harmful system in so many ways. Sometimes it seems like there is so much bad in the world it just seems impossible to make any sort of difference. But rather than spiraling down into a cycle of despair, cynicism and apathy, it seems better to do the few things I can do. First is just being the kind of ethical person I want to be and trying to make the world a better place in my immediate circle. Sometimes I wish I had money to throw at problems, but I definitely don't have that. So the next best thing I think is to support businesses who are ethical, which is difficult since so many seem to have shady practices, but at least I can try...so here are a few links I found that may be helpful...

Companies that bought life insurance policies on their employees (dead peasants insurance program). There are so many companies here it is probably difficult to avoid all of these, but I can try, and this does renew my determination not to shop at Wal-Mart.

Ethical companies of 2009. A good list of good companies, though a report from the WSJ does warn that this list has some conflicts of interest. Though so does the WSJ...

Does anyone else know of other good, ethical companies, that are not listed here? Or horrible ones to avoid? I'd love to hear about them.

the F word

I have been taking a sabbatical from dating this summer, and my life has never been so drama-free...well except when I was Mormon and not dating (though that wasn't really on purpose). But in a fit of insanity last night I started thinking about it again...thinking maybe I have been looking for the wrong types of guys, and maybe if I can just find ones I'm more compatible with...so I got on the dating website I have used in the past, and put in a search for feminist. There are 70 men within 50 miles who have that word on their profile, and 180 women. Looking through the mens' profiles I saw a lot of "I'm a feminist and a chivalrous gentleman." Really? Is this even possible? Or a better question, is it what do I want, and if not, what the hell do I want? Looking at the womens' profiles, at first I thought, "great, maybe I can read some feminist womens' profiles to give me an idea of what to put on my profile." Unfortunately, most women's mention of feminism was of the "I'm independent, etc...but don't worry, I'm not a feminist." Trying really hard to convince men that they weren't that sort of annoying woman.

So it seems like the men either really believe they need to be the old-fashioned type, or think that's what we want...so they say that's who they are. And we, the women want to be seen as not needy, not bitchy...not like those girls. We're all trying to be (or not be) stereotypical TV characters (apparently a lot of men really hate Carrie Bradshaw), old girlfriends and boyfriends who drove us crazy, as well as roles we were taught by our churches and parents, when the world was different. It seems difficult to actually be ourselves with all the other options out there.

I'm not really looking for a "gentleman, " someone who believes in "chivalry." I don't really care if he holds the door, as long as he isn't not holding it to make a point. Can't the person who gets to the door first hold it for the other person? I don't want to be "taken care of." Can't we take care of each other and ourselves?

The most difficult part of all of this, and the part that I think reflects a lot of other issues is money. I wrote about this when I was dating a guy awhile ago. I'm just not sure what the right stance is for me, or more accurately, if my stance makes me an asshole. I believe in equality. I don't think that has to mean we all have to contribute the exact same thing to a relationship (which would be impossible and undesirable), and I also don't think it has to be as the LDS church says, separating by roles by gender. Why can't I contribute my skills and resources, and you contribute yours, us both putting in what we have?

Of course, what I am really saying here is that I don't make a lot of money. I grew up thinking I would never have to really have a career, and providing for myself or others was never really a huge concern when choosing possible professions. So I chose education and career opportunities that consist mostly of women, and are lower-paying. I figured I would marry at least by my early twenties, stay home with kids, etc. Its almost laughable to me now that I didn't consider any other alternatives, and I'm not trying to shift all the blame to my upbringing. But now, in my thirties, do I attempt to get a high paying job so I can have economic equality and power? Do I date guys that are more "traditional", even though I disagree with most of their principles, so I don't have to worry about the money thing? Do I say, fine, let's date equally, you pay half and I pay half, and by the way, I can only go to happy hours and cheap restaurants, but enjoy your steak?

I believe in equality, but equality hasn't come yet. Women still get paid significantly less than men on average, though individual circumstances vary. If I make less than a third of what you make, is it wrong of me to hope that once we actually decide to be together, that you'll put in a little more than half where money is concerned? Am I crazy to want individual circumstances to be taken into account, while also not wanting to be coddled? And is it really possible to have equal power in a relationship when there is not equal economic circumstances? And how on earth would one go about discussing this early on in dating?

Least I offend anyone, I know there are thoughtful, feminist men like the ones I am describing, they just seem to be so hard to find! And I don't have anything against traditional roles, as long as that's what you both want. I just think there should be choice, not unexamined assumptions.

I understand men likely feel like they can't win in circumstances like this and I don't blame them. I feel the same way. Thoughts?

from 1900 to 3008

I was never particularly good at Mormon dating. Making it to 29 as an active Mormon woman proves this. Even though I wasn't good at it, I at least felt like I knew the rules, and knew how it was supposed to work, and I saw many friends married off in the 10+ years I was in singles wards. And I just kept on holding on, waiting, doing and not doing the same things, and in a way that was easy. Easy, because that was what was expected of you, but lonely for sure.

Now that I've left the church, I find myself dating in what feels like a completely different world. A world I am THRILLED to be in, in so many ways. I have at least 5 close friends who are 30-ish single women who have recently left the church, and for this I feel very lucky to have people I can relate to. As my friends and I talk about navigating these new waters, we comment that we sometimes feel like teenagers, yet with more emotional maturity, creating an interesting dynamic.

I know that dating and understand the opposite sex is hard for many, whether you're both Mormon, or not religious at all. And there is no shortage of advice from people, books, and magazines. Whether it is old-fashioned game playing advice that feels disingenuous and manipulative, or the too optimistic "just tell him your feelings" from those who hope we are in a post-feminist world, or have just forgotten how difficult dating is, it is rarely simple. That, and it seems everyone is operating under different assumptions. Often it seems people take their experiences, which have been shaped by society, and generalize, saying that's how things have always been. I think that nowhere is this more apparent than in talk of gender. I recently read a fascinating book on marriage recently:

Marriage, a History: From Obedience to Intimacy, or How Love Conquered Marriage
by Stephanie Coontz


It started out with the beginnings of the history of marriage, and since I'm a history nerd, I loved it. She talked about how in the beginning people married to gain connections, mainly by the way of in-laws. This purpose remained number one for a long time. During this time period, men and women did have different roles, but both were responsible for contributing to the household for food and care. Since the book covers a lot of history in the West, I won't go into detail about all the changes which have taken place over time. But she basically explains how marriage started as something that was necessary in order to keep society together and was not related to love. As Europe and the U.S. became more industrial, women gained more power, and therefore had more options. Thus, a loving marriage become more of a goal as women gained greater independence, though marriages were still based on society's rules and acceptance. Coontz posits that in the past 30 years, marriage has changed more than it did in hundreds of years before. Marriage is no longer a sure thing in people's life or in signaling entrance into adulthood. Because both sexes have options for economic independence, sexuality, and acceptance outside of marriage, it is no longer a given. People have become less and less likely to stay in a marriage that is not satisfying. Though many family values advocates decry this as ruinous for society, Coontz takes a very pragmatic approach, that we can't turn back time and that changes are here to stay. She also talks about the many positives of the love-based marriage and its capacity for great closeness.

What struck me most about this book, and which hopefully brings it back to what I was talking about in the beginning about dating, is that one of the time periods I best identified with in this book was the 1900's. That's about when it was no longer acceptable to publicly say women were not as good as men, so they started saying women were just different, and better. Men and women have different roles and capabilities, and that each were better suited for certain activities, depending on their gender. Mens roles just happened to be the ones with the power. It all sounded very Proclamation on the Family to me.

I grew up in what is thought of as a traditional family, with my father working and my mother at home caring for the children, though this didn't really become "traditonal" till the 1950's. I think I've always been a bit conflicted with what I saw at home and was told was the right way, and what I saw and heard about others doing, both in the Mormon world and in society as a whole. While I heard what was supposedly acceptable in the world, non-traditional families, mothers working outside the home, pre-marital sex, it always seemed just something other people did. Though I think I always had an issue with pre-defined roles, I never knew how to articulate this, so I just lived with the ambiguity in myself, and tried to insert myself into the Mormon dating world, hoping it would eventually work for me. It didn't, and here I am trying to figure out a world I thought I didn't need to pay any attention to for most of my life.

One of the most positive things Coontz talks about is how most dating and marriage advice is out of date, because society is changing faster than can keep up. So all of those ideas about how the man must chase the woman, and what each is looking for in a partner are not neccessarily up to date. We still have many people willing to tell us advice based on old assumptions, though a lot more relationships are more equitable than this. So I continue on, not being a slave to my past, or others ideas; fumbling through the new world of dating and sex and relationships, and marriage. Maybe I'll figure out, maybe I won't, but at least I'm having a good time trying...

Chill

So I was all worried about the family vacation. The first day or so took some getting used to, and I found myself thinking, "What will we talk about?!? We're not having any deep conversations!" With my friends and cousins, I'm so accustomed to talking about EVERYTHING, and with my family, there just isn't that dynamic. It seemed to me a different life altogether, or maybe I was visiting a different country.

But then, after a day or two, (and a few phone calls to those people I really can talk to), I realized I had to accept the situation for what it was, and my family for who they are. They are really great people. I tried to stop wondering if they were secretly judging me for drinking coffee (my dad did whisper to someone that it smelled bad), or wearing tank tops (pretty sure they were jealous, they just wore their swim suits a lot instead). They didn't act at all judgemental, so why should I imagine they were? It was as if the conversation with my brother never happened. Which is okay. I didn't feel like I had to pretend, and no one made a big deal out of anything. We had a lot of fun, and honestly it was really nice and relaxing not having drama and discussing every detail of everything under the sun. I also really loved hanging out with my 14 month old nephew. I am not always into kids, but I love that little boy.

So a lot of worry over nothing, but I am feeling good about things.