« Say Hello To... | Main | The Chronic Curmudgeon Pop Culture Top 50: #19-#16 »
October 19, 2005
A Wise Man Explains Dating in New York...
One of the things I enjoy most about the gig I am in right now at my company is that in the new role, I am working directly now with colleagues who also happened to be my friends before I started the new job. Makes the day go faster to be doing conference calls with people you have beers with, you know? One of those folks is also on my blogroll off to the right side of the page -- my friend Ethan. In his most recent entry, Ethan summarized a frustration that I share about life in New York -- but that I have never articulated quite so clearly or effectively. He has a friend in town from Europe, and the friend asked him about what it's like to deal with the dating scene in New York. His response was pure brilliance.
Imagine, if you will, an economy that suddenly has unlimited currency and you'll have an idea of what it's like to date in NYC. Suddenly, all the value is gone and the currency is cheapened and buying anything is out of whack. Look at me: great career, going to school for an interesting degree, musically inclined, I have hair and teeth, not a sociopath yadda yadda. But right next to me is a guy with all that and 10% more. And next to him is another guy likewise endowed, but he's taller, or more handsome, or funnier or whatever. And the same goes for the ladies.
He's right. It's an incredibly daunting scene here, because of the way New York is. Too many perfect people come here -- because we've all been raised on the idea that this place is the pinnacle (you know, the whole "if you can make it there, you can make it anywhere" thing), so everyone here was a big fish in their own small pond somewhere. It's like living in a city full of homecoming kings/queens and Big Men/Women On Campus. And so no matter how good looking, how funny, how charming, how successful, how kind, how nice you are... you will never be the best looking, the funniest, the most charming, the most successful, the kindest, the nicest, the most anything fish in the sea -- there is always someone more so. Odds are, a lot more. So no matter how much of a catch you would be anywhere else, here you're just one of the crowd; the competition is that fierce, and so you have to come up with other ways to try and stand out. Which can be damned frustrating. The scary thing for me is that a younger, hipper, good-looking guy like Ethan feels that same kind of pressure. I'm older, wider, much more suburban/less cool, and have less hair (not to mention that what I have is largely dependent on Clairol Men's Choice for its brown-ness)... I do okay, but it's still a daunting task. I'd feel better thinking I was just neurotic, and that no one else had observed the same thing.
Ethan also puts his finger on the other half of the unique NYC dynamics...
What's more, everyone who has come to NYC has come here to pursue a dream - or most of the people anyway. And in all likelihood, that dream is not "get married and have kids before I'm 30." But at the same time, we're all on the same mortal timeline as the rest of the world. Our hair and teeth and ovaries are failing at the same rate. So at some point we have to give in to that pressure (desire?) to have children - and have them somewhere clean and nice. And so, Philippe, it's complex. Dating in New York has given rise to all kinds of new definitions and substrata of relationships. Are we friends? Are we lovers? Are we friends with benefits? Are we f*ck buddies? Are we a one night stand? And it's all terra infirma until there's a ring or a lease or a marriage certificate involved. But I hear even then it's not so unambiguous!
Yeah, I know, dating is tough all over. But I've dated in five other states plus the District of Columbia, and I'll swear to you that the dynamics are more confusing and complicated here than anywhere else. Like Ethan says, this place is full of extraordinarily ambitious people (hell, I'm among them) who have their plan all mapped out, and those plans rarely involve anyone who could slow their progress toward ruling the world. But no one's immune to the pressures of aging -- and so you end up with a whole bunch of people (women and men) who will swear on the graves of their ancestors that all they want is the occasional human contact and need-meeting (you know what that means).
So we develop a set of progressively casual relationships that remain wholly undefined because no one wants to define them, except for when somebody does, though the one who may want it doesn't even admit as much to themselves, much less to the other person... see, that's the part that makes it different here. The same confusions and complexities that make relationships a universal challenge are exacerbated here, because everyone here isn't just trying to figure out the other person, they're fighting their own battle between their id and their ego, and the behavior they want from you changes with whichever one is winning that day. And conversely, the behavior you want from them changes depending on whether your id or ego is winning that day. So that's why those strata that Ethan mentioned begin to evolve.
This is the only place I've ever been where "friends with benefits" is different than f*ck buddies. Both of which are different than dating, by the way, which implies something more, but isn't as serious as lovers. Not that either of you want that -- nothing involved that would complicate your plan to be king of the mountain is allowed. Except when it is. Does your head hurt yet? And all this confusion is there even assuming that neither one has baggage from a previous situation. Get a divorce or a messed up past situation into the picture, and then there's virtually no way to maintain sanity.
I have no idea what the point of this post was.
Comments
I don't see the point of the article either, but this comment (not yours), "So at some point we have to give in to that pressure (desire?) to have children...", is pure BS. The very idea that one *must have* children is what's helped to lead the world to its present, grossly overpopulated state. It's time to cast it aside.
Posted by: Mike at October 20, 2005 03:12 PM
Mike,
While I agree with you on the whole overbreeding thing, I don't really think you meant to suggest that the whole biological clock thing doesn't exist. (If so, I humbly suggest that you've never dated a 35 year old woman who has not yet had a baby.) There is pressure -- not just social, but also very real (if unspoken or unattributable) biological pressure that kicks in... and don't say we're not wired for it, because every species is biologically wired for self-perpetuation).
I'm not saying that giving in to the urge is always wise, or that repeatedly giving in to the urge is a good thing. But I am saying that deliberately going childless is less of a natural state than breeding. Accidents happen; meanwhile, one has to make a conscious choice to not have children.
Again, not saying you're wrong... just saying that I don't think it's fair to start holding people's biology against them.
Posted by: Curmudgeon at October 21, 2005 03:20 AM
I'm not holding it against them. The question in my mind is, are we animals (with no control over our reproductive urges), or are we thinking beings (with some degree of control of same)? This question (of course) has about 6.4 billion varied answers.
Whatever any particular individuals' answer might be, it is my feeling that a healthy part of the so-called biological clock is societal in origin. Present day US culture practically worships children for some unknown reason, and the government *still* financially encourages people to breed. I could ramble forever on this subject, but I'll spare you. My typing skills aren't up to it in any case.
BTW, I'm married to a 35-ish female, who (at least so far) doesn't seem to be affected by any ticking. Seeing what messes many of our friends lives have become after having the requisite sprat or two has helped in this matter, I'm sure.
Posted by: Mike at October 21, 2005 11:50 AM
I like your comments on dating and your other blogs which are soo unsuburban.Are you a scout dad in a suburb of NYC? You look familiar.
Posted by: Aprilshowerz at October 26, 2005 02:06 PM
Of course you look familiar. You're Tom D. He has a doppleganger in my town. You're not who I thought you were. But you're blog is still interesting in a sad kind of 'working hard to feel immortal' kind of way.
Posted by: Aprilshowerz at October 26, 2005 04:55 PM
This is an ancient post, but worth commenting on. Imagine how it feels for those of us who are born and bred in NYC - 3rd generation and beyond. An endles influx of new people who feel they're going to show up, conquer the world, and tell us what "NYC is all about".
Personally, I wish more people would find a new place to "find themselves" in so some of us who have actually survived being born here can stand a chance at buying a damn apt.
Posted by: Quantum Flux at August 19, 2006 03:25 AM
