Laura Shumaker is a writer whose 23-year-old son has autism. He wants to connect with the world, but isn’t sure how — at least not according to unwritten social law and convention. In a clear, spare guest post at Motherlode about a puzzling (to him) non-incident involving a hotel, a hot tub and the girls’ lacrosse team, she expresses her fears, and hopes, about his future as lover and loved. It’s a sweet and smart post, ultimately concluding (spoiler!) that in order to support Matthew through this, she’s gonna have to connect honestly with herself first. Read it, and then this, to (if you’re neurotypical) remind yourself not to take communication and social-spider-sense for granted, and to upend a few stereotypes about people on the spectrum and the possibility of love.

Negotiating the peace on April 20, 1998…

Dear Breakup Girl,

I happened upon your site the morning after my girlfriend dumped me. Your advice columns (and seeing that “I’m not the only one”) have really helped me through this. I hadn’t been in any kind of romantic relationship for four or five years before this one, and I was pretty broken up about the whole thing. But now I can almost sit back a little and think about it. One of the things my ex said in her “can I talk to you” talk was that (of course) “its not you, its me”, and “we can still be friends.” Not having had this work for me at all in the past (the friend-afterwards part) I don’t know how to try and make it work. I’d really like to be friends (and not just friendly, as a coworker mentioned most of his “let’s be friends” relationships went), but I just don’t know how to make that work.

I think my ex has done a lot to help the process, by listening to me a couple of times I’ve wanted to talk/vent, and by being very understanding of my need to talk with her at times. The result is that I don’t despise or hate her, like I have with other exes, and from what I can gather and what I feel, this is a good start to some sort of “friend”-based relationship.

So is there any thing I can do to help facilitate this friend (re)building process? I know that I’m not completely “over her” yet, and I don’t want to seem like I’m too attached. I think she may have already moved on to someone new, and I don’t want
to get in the way. So how do I go about making sure she knows that I am (will be) available for a friend, but not give her the wrong idea, or affect her current relationship (if any)?

– Chris

(more…)

A quick answer from April 6, 1998…

Dear Breakup Girl,

I went out with this girl once and whenever I try and ask her out again, she always makes a grossed-out face and walks away before I even go up to her! I don’t know what to consider that other date since she hasn’t said anything about it. What does this all mean?

– Ji

Dear Ji –

I think she’s doing The Rules! Go for it!

Love,
Breakup Girl

Would you break up over Facebook? Like, not by message, or by chat, or by going out to harvest Farmville artichokes and not coming back — but simply by changing your relationship status from “in a relationship” to “single”? Well, YOU wouldn’t, of course, but that guy/girl might: As Mashable.com reports, “a recent poll shows that one out of four newly dumped Facebook users found out about the breakup by seeing it publicly broadcast on Facebook. Ouch!” According to other survey data (1000 people, 70/30 men/women) from AreYouInterested:
– Around 21% of respondents said they would carry out a Facebook breakup by changing their status to single.
– Nearly 40% of respondents have updated their status on Facebook so the person they’re dating sees they have plans.
– And almost 35% of respondents have used their Facebook status to make someone think they have plans, even if they don’t.

The second two of the above sound mad manipulative, but — while I’m not applauding either — they’re not that different from what we did when had phones (get this) ONLY IN OUR HOMES and we could make people think we were NOT THERE by simply not answering. Haw! But the Facebook breakup? Of course this isn’t the first BG has heard of such a thing, and it is pretty much inevitable. (As one Mashable commenter noted, “Since a relationship isn’t official until it’s posted to Facebook, it must only be fair that a relationship isn’t officially over until it too is posted on Facebook.”) But PEOPLE. It’s pretty much the new-tech equivalent of breaking up by outgoing message. (”If this is Stan, it’s over. Everyone else, please wait for the tone.”) TACKY.

What do you think? Are electronic breakups of any kind ever acceptable? When might there be an ethical difference among Facebook breakups, text breakups, Second Life breakups? Think about it: Why, really, is an IM breakup, which seems despicable, that much worse than a phone breakup, say (which BG defends under certain circumstances, e.g. to prevent someone travelling across the country to see you only to have you say “See ya”)? Let us know in the comments.

Drawing it out on March 30, 1998…

Dear Breakup Girl,

For the duration of our nine-month relationship, my ex tried to convince me that we were “meant to be.” Without warning or reason, he then dumps me citing the “I love you but am not ‘in love’ with you” excuse. Whatever. Aside from one business like letter he sent a week post break up (and an angry follow up phone call on my part), we have not spoken since and it’s been six months. I am over him and the break up was definitely for the best, but I wonder now if this was the most healthy way to handle things. Although the lack of contact helped the healing process, would it have been better to have long, painful phone conversations analyzing what went wrong just so I have a clue? Do you advocate the “cold turkey”/no contact approach even in the absence of a concrete breakup explanation?

– B.

Dear B.,

A “long, painful phone conversation” does not a “concrete breakup explanation” make. Trust me, you didn’t miss much.

Love,
Breakup Girl

As you know, BG is not a big fan of revenge. But this right here is some evil genius.

You know that charming but not TOO charming, witty but not TOO witty, flirty but not TOO flirty back-and-forth you’ve struck up with that guy at CouldThisBeTheOne.com? You might actually be flirting back not with that guy himself, but with virtual-virtual him: a correspondent hired to take care of the pre-meeting nitty-gritty online half of online dating.

The Washington Post reports that more and more singles (roughly 80% men) are getting some very personal assistants — whether their own secretaries or via a new cottage industry of ghost writers — to manage their online dating correspondence for them: creating their profiles and handling all  correspondence up to but not including the actual, real-life date. Why? Mostly, they tell the Post, because they’re busy. Really busy. And yes, to be fair, the online part of online dating — while efficient — can indeed be time-consuming. Then again, so can explaining why it was not actually YOU that they’d been flirting with the whole time. So.

Part of me wants to say “Hey, we’re all ‘busy.’ Make time, hosers.” But part of me can summon a little more rachmones than that. I mean, they’re trying. They’re not giving up. They’re not getting all Up in the Air and letting “busy” be an excuse for not searching at all. Tacky, maybe, but there’s some hope there, too. And I can always get behind hope.

What do you think? Acceptable compromise, or Cyrano-no?

MSN.com, Match.com, HappenMagazine.com: they’re in a healthy and satisfying 3-way relationship. Meaning that you can find MSN/Match.com’s “Ask Lynn” columns –penned by BG’s alter ego — over at Happen now as well.

This week Lynn responds to Hoping It Works, a fellow who’s online relationship is ready to go IRL, only he’s left out certain information about himself. No, it’s not that he’s gained 20 pounds since his profile pic shot on Spring Break ’96 — it’s that he is has a disability.

I don’t know how to bring this up into casual conversation because we have not had that many online conversations. I’m concerned about saying too much or having too many rules that will turn her off, but if I don’t say enough it could cause a situation that’s dangerous for me.

What to say and when to say it? Read the full letter at Happen for Lynn’s take, then add your own in the comments or experiences below!

Classic advice from April 13, 1998…

Dear Breakup Girl,

My boyfriend and I have been dating for the past six months. He is a sweet, intelligent, smart, funny guy, but he treats me like I’m God. He never disagrees and falls at my feet. Every other word out of his mouth is “I love you! You are beautiful!” and that’s it!!! I think without these words he would have nothing to say at all. I know most women would die to have a man like this but, personally, I feel like I’m encased in a tomb! How can I tell him that too much of a good thing IS bad, and that we need to stop things before they get any worse…?

– Suffocating

(more…)

Age: 9.

City: Detroit, MI

Activities: Standing in a department store trying on school uniforms. Being adjusted in said uniform by my mother. Witnessing my first public fight as another mother yells at her son.

Quotations: From yelling mother – “Pants don’t fit you. You’re too fat. You should stop eating. Why can’t you be more like the other kids? My life is hard enough without having to come home and deal with your sorry %*@!

Status: I watch furtively, and then hide behind my mother. A silent thank you to the powers that be. My mother says something to the woman about being in public and embarrassing her child. The woman scoffs.

In the New York Times’ I Need to Vent. Hello, Facebook, Skyler Hurt, 22, friend and bridesmaid to a feuding couple, likewise, intervened:

“Hey, you guys know we can still see this right …?”

Apparently, couples DO know their fights are being observed, and like the mother yelling in the store, they don’t care. In fact, as the Times article notes, some of them welcome the chance to publicly air their grievances for friends and family to see.

Michael Vincent Miller, psychologist and author of the book “Intimate Terrorism: The Crisis of Love in an Age of Disillusion” notes:

Today, popular representations of marriage tend toward “two very self-protective egos at war with one another,”…“each wanting vindication and to be right by showing that the other is wrong.”

The thing is, isn’t marriage about two individuals coming together as a couple? By using Facebook and other social media to gain “support” for their respective “sides” in an argument or disagreement, it feels more like they are keeping separate counsel and setting up camps to do battle. Additionally, when you ask your friends and family to constantly choose sides and what they see most is your Facebook status rather than your faces at the dinner table, that support each person is looking for individually can quickly turn into disapproval for the couple as a whole. [Plus: "Tacky!" -- BG]

Brad Wilcox, director of the National Marriage Project at the University of Virginia would agree.

“People tend to do better in their marriage when friends and family are supportive,” Mr. Wilcox said. “When that support dries up, that can be a really big problem.”

Additionally, in an era rife with passive aggressive forms of communication, from sites that allow you to anonymously tell your friends and family what you really think to others that allow you to virtually “slap” someone, one has to wonder exactly where we’re going. Are we really evolving as thinking and feeling human beings or is technology slowly unraveling us? Have we become a society where we are more comfortable interfacing virtually with our partners rather than speaking with them when they are sitting in front of us? Just as importantly, will couples venting their frustrations with each other in the new public spaces, as parents, do the same to their children? Will anyone say anything?

The accompanying photo was particularly powerful as one of the couples sits together on the couch, their faces aglow, not with love, but lit from the screens of their laptops. While the Victorian ideals of marriage are thankfully passé, the openness that modern couples should be striving for is openness with each other, not the World Wide Web.