What's Your Line? 3 February 1999

8:26 PM: Once again, forgot to set the stupid timer on the stupid VCR. Who bought who here anyway?

9:56: Strange dreams this morning. Non-dreams, almost. I didn't feel much like I was asleep, just kind of ... away. Cranky. Goddamn phone rang four times today. Two telemarketers and someone trying to fax something to White Castle Cab Company at my phone number. This is why I almost never answer the phone or the doorbell anymore.

Let's follow some logic here. There are some people I find attractive, and some I don't. The attractive ones almost always have a Steady. I'm guessing that this is because I'm not alone in finding them attractive. But that implies that if people find you attractive, then your chances of finding one to go out with are high. So what about the converse? If your empirically-observed chances of finding someone to go out with are low, doesn't that imply that you are not someone that people find attractive? And, further, that's likely to be true of the other people out there who aren't attached. This is why Singles Nights are hell.

If that all hangs together, and it seems to, then it seems like there are four choices:

1. Make yourself into someone people find attractive. This probably accounts for half the national GDP these days.
2. Change your own criteria for who you find attractive. See "punk rock".
3. Keep trying and looking, hoping for a statistically-unlikely meeting, as if you were Tom Hanks or something, I'm sure.
4. Give up. This is the default, and a very popular choice, I believe.

Does this lead me to a conclusion? Not necessarily. What if what's unattractive about you is your personality? I guess that's what the Learning Annex's business plan is based on, but still, it seems like that would be kind of hard to change without a drastic change in the way and where you live. You think? This is just kind of theoretical farting around, which can drive some people nuts, I know.

So far I think I'm basically following strategy #4, with a slight amount of #2, while I think about #1 without actually doing anything, and kind of vaguely wish for #3. I think I will assert my rights as the author of these bogus choices, and officially name this the Loser Pattern. Wonder if I could get a grant out of this. Or a book deal, hmm... Unsuccessful Strategies of Ineffective People. "'However bad you feel about yourself, as long as you can afford this book, you're almost certainly better off than these losers.' - Liz Smith"

Speaking of wishy-washyness (washiness?), I couldn't make up my mind who I wanted to put as my February pin-up, Bjork (for Homogenic), PJ Harvey (for Is This Desire?), or Alanis (for Supposed Former Infatuation Junkie). So I didn't. But you'll probably have to reload the page a lot to figure that out, so maybe you should just take my word for it.

Willfully blind self-indulgent nebbish or amusingly quirky old coot? And how bout that local sports team? Discuss among yourselves.

yestoday		today		tomorrowday
	archive		semi-bio
listen!		random		privit
previous back two list all random     open pages     webring next five ahead two next
prev skip prev random     archipelago     list sites skip next next
All names are fake, most places are real, the author is definitely unreliable but it's all in good fun. Yep. © 1998-1999 Lighthouse for the Deaf. All rights reserved and stuff. The motto at the top of the page is a graffito I saw on Brunswick Street in Melbourne.