Microwave Cooking for One: Sad or Spectacular? May 29, 2012
Posted by Onely in Food for Thought, Secret Lives of the Happily Single, single and happy, Your Responses Requested!.Tags: cooking for onelers, lobsters, maraconi, microwave cooking for one, single people have dignity
4 comments
Christina and I had a mini-Onely reunion when I landed in Philadelphia for a conference (she drove all the way up from Northern Virginia to see me – yay!). Among our many adventures, we found ourselves wandering around a delightful used bookstore in downtown Philly. Just as we were about to leave, I stumbled upon a major find – a cookbook entitled Microwave Cooking for One. It was so amazing, I decided to splurge and buy it ($2 USD + tax), and I gave it to Christina, since I don’t have a microwave.
We haven’t tested any of the recipes, but wanted to share some of our favorites so far – they range from fancy to practical, as you can see:
Lobster Tail:
Fresh or Frozen, it’s no problem!
You can be sure to enjoy a rubbery, buttery meal for one with this delicious “Lobster Tail” meal for one.
Macaroni:
The lovely Ms. Marie T. Smith gives us a more traditional recipe for pasta in the second version of this recipe, but if you cook the first version, the pasta (which she generally calls “macaroni”) will absorb all the water! I’ve never seen pasta do this, but I’m intrigued by the powers possessed by the microwave. There’s nothing like enjoying a soggy pasta topped with cold sauce (we can’t figure out why the sauce isn’t getting microwaved too) all by oneself.
Obviously, Christina and I are all in favor of cooking and eating for one and are happy to see progress made in this direction, but we also value our dignity. You might be able to guess our answer to this question, but we don’t want to be unfair to the talented Ms. Smith… Copious Readers, what do you think: Is Microwave Cooking for One Sad or Spectacular?
Onely Hearts Valentine’s Day February 14, 2012
Posted by Onely in We like. . ., Your Responses Requested!.Tags: candy hearts, lonely hearts, National Singles Week, single and happy, singles blog
2 comments
My co-blogger Lisa and I historically have struggled with what to write for our Valentine’s Day post. As a blog about progressive singlehood, we feel we are expected to write something. But one can only write so many times about what a dumb holiday Valentine’s Day is, before one begins to bore oneself.
So this year we’re writing about the non-dumb side of Valentine’s Day, which is, of course, CANDY HEARTS!
I love those little chalky pastel-colored hearts, not only because they are calorie- and sugar-free (they dissolve so delightfully on the tongue, how could they contain anything but fizz and love?). I also love how the classic candy hearts are printed with messages that range from sweet to desperate to creepy: Honey Bee. Cutie Pie. Sweet Love. Be good. My baby. Hug me. Let’s kiss. All mine. Do me. (Ok, maybe not that last one.)
We need bags of hearts for each and every holiday, especially National Singles Week. Oh yeah, an entire week’s worth of candy hearts! Poor one-day Valentine’s fans can suck it (literally).
Copious Readers, what words would you stamp on candy hearts for National Singles’ Week in September (I plan early)? We haven’t yet gotten much of a response from you on our request for Renga poems, so we’re going to keep poking away at your creative potential until it bursts forth. Like a geyser. Or a zit. Either will be fine.
Here are some suggestions off the top of my head, ranging from personal to political to dorky: Not alone. Equal pay. All families. Single mom. Single dad. Stop showers. Who’s selfish? Super solo. One fun. Not looking. Live alone. Cohabitate. Love too. Myth free. So fine.
–Christina
Photo credit: megaul
Poetry for Progressive Singles: Your Responses Requested! February 2, 2012
Posted by Onely in Your Responses Requested!.Tags: haiku, poetry for singles, renga, single stereotypes
5 comments
I continue to wish for a pithy slogan that progressive singles can chant during all the protest marches that we also don’t have. We’re here, we’re queer, get used to it is great but, unfortunately, taken. We’re here, we’re single, we don’t have a jingle. But that’s ok, because we have Renga!
My intrepid co-blogger Lisa introduced me to this traditional Japanese poetry form, which the 17th century poet Basho believed embodied the notion of “refraining from stepping back” (this is according to Wikipedia, not Lisa, whose knowledge does have some limits). Because the spirit of Renga is moving forward in constant change, what better artistic venue is there for paradigm-shattering singles advocates like us?
Copious Readers, let’s use the Comments feature to create an ongoing collaborative Renga about singlehood–its culture, challenges, quirks, aspirations.
Renga works like this: The first poet composes a haiku, which consists of three lines, with five, seven, and five syllables respectively. For example: (more…)
Like this:
Dreaming an Impossible Dream: Marriage January 16, 2012
Posted by Onely in Everyday Happenings, Food for Thought, Heteronormativity, Your Responses Requested!.Tags: anti-Onely psyche, dream interpretation, marriage dreams, married and unhappy
15 comments
Some people dream about getting married. Over here at Onely, we pride ourselves on rejecting that dream – or at least knocking it off its idyllic “dream” platform.
But what’s going on when a Oneler literally has a dream about getting married?
I’m not sure, but I can say this: It’s unsettling… Just over a week ago, I woke up at 4am remembering that I’d almost gotten married; as I put the strange pieces together and recalled the emotions I felt during the dream, I worried: did my psyche just make me a traitor to my Oneliness? (more…)
Every Oneler Needs an Elf October 16, 2011
Posted by Onely in Everyday Happenings, Food for Thought, single and happy, Your Responses Requested!.Tags: busy and overwhelmed, elves do the cleaning, onelers save the world, spousal support
14 comments
Shortly before I moved overseas, I visited my dear, intelligent and highly articulate co-blogger Christina in Washington, D.C. I stayed with her for about a week, and for some of that week, she had to be at work. I, too, had work to do, but I worked from (her) home.
So, being the conscientious and grateful guest that I am, I tried to clean up after myself while I was at home and while Christina was at work. Sometimes I cleaned a few things for her, too.
The first time I did this, Christina came home and exclaimed, “Oh my goodness! Little elves have visited!!” But the next morning before she left for work, Christina made me promise that I wouldn’t let the elves visit again. “No problem,” I promised.
But they visited again. As a guest in Christina’s home, I couldn’t help myself; what’s more, Christina appreciated it (not to mention that it gave her less work to do and more time to spend with me!). After she came home to the after-effects of elf-doings the second day, we determined that everyone needs a magical elf who takes care of the little details of life while we’re working on the big issues (saving the world and all that jazz).
And indeed, now that I’ve landed here in Beirut and have had no choice but to head full throttle into my new job and my new life, I’m wishing that I had a little elf (or three) to help me manage the little things while I teach my classes and attend meetings and begin my research. I need them to unpack all the boxes that arrived a week and a half ago (the boxes I sent to myself from Louisville so long ago) while I take day trips around the country (hello Byblos!). I’d like my elves to pester the phone company about getting internet access while I have lunch with new friends. And I’d really appreciate it if they could help me figure out the best and most efficient way for me to get internet at home while I take Kitty the dog for a run along Mediterranean coastline.
I’m strong, independent, and I am definitely single and (very) happy. But I’ve decided that every Oneler, after declaring oneself as such, deserves an elf in the sidelines – someone who can read my mind and anticipate my needs. But … isn’t that what a spouse is supposed to do? Fellow Onelers, what are your thoughts? What would you accomplish if “only” you had a little elf to do your bidding?
– Lisa
Popping The Question: So, Why Are You Still Single? September 5, 2011
Posted by Onely in As If!, Everyday Happenings, Your Responses Requested!.Tags: awkward questions, responses to why are you single, rude questions, rude singles questions, why aren't you
17 comments
This post originally appeared in the book Singlism, by Bella DePaulo. It reprises earlier posts–here and here and here–where Onely and our Copious Readers discussed awkward questions about relationship status and how to respond to them. Readers’ responses originally appeared in the comments sections of the above links. We look forward to hearing more ideas about how you all would “pop” unsavory or singlist questions.
Long before Lisa and I created Onely.org, I was on the phone with a friendly, interesting guy I’d met at a party (let’s call him Ralph). Some minutes into the conversation, Ralph hit me with the question, “So, why are you still single?” I paused, unsure how to reply. I felt as if he had judged my life and found an inadequacy I’d never noticed–the way I might feel when someone says, “You’re wearing that?” So I hemmed and hawed and cancelled our coffee date and never called him again. Extreme? Maybe. Defensive? Perhaps a little. Probably other things about him bothered me, too. But all I remember is that one question, and the feeling of a switch clicking over in my heart. I couldn’t figure out why Ralph’s words bothered me, not until much later.
Our friends, family, colleagues (and even strangers!) usually intend to be helpful and friendly when they ask:
You’re so [complimentary adjective here]; so, why are you still single?
However, when they pose this question, they imply that being single is a sickness no one would possibly tolerate if they could help it – as if singlehood were a gross, drippy nose that could and should be cured by a swallow of Sudafed.
In a series of posts on Onely, Lisa and I identified two major problems with the question:
First, posing this question suggests that because an individual has [insert complimented-upon superb qualities here], that individual must be 1) seeking a relationship, and 2) happy when in a relationship because of impressive personal attributes. It’s a case of faulty logic, really, to assume that a person’s personal qualities have anything to do with whether they should be in a relationship, will be successful or happy in one, and/or even want to be in a relationship.
Second, the question evaluates the single person on account of his or her single status – it seems to ask, “You are in this less-than-ideal state, but you have the ability to extract yourself from this state, so why haven’t you done so?” In other words, this question ignores the fact that a single person may not agree with the questioner’s assumption that an individual’s single status is less than ideal.
So, we asked ourselves and readers of Onely, what’s a happily single person to do when confronted by this question – or one of its many variants? The retorts ranged from snarky to goofy to politely educational. We’ve collected some of our favorites below: (more…)
If You Actually Read Onely, We Wouldn’t Make Fun. Promise. July 14, 2011
Posted by Onely in Great Onely Activities, Pop Culture: Scourge of the Onelys, Singled Out, STFU, Your Responses Requested!.Tags: dear college dating advice guy, stupid unsolicited emails
4 comments
Every so often, Christina and I receive emails from folks who obviously haven’t read our blog. Usually, these folks introduce themselves and say kind, generic things–”Love the blog!” “Keep up the great work!” “WOW! You two are such excellent writers, we’d like to offer you a book contract!” (Well, ok, not that last one.)
We’re flattered, of course. But we know they’re liars. How do we know? Because they send us links and encourage us to direct you, Copious Readers, to their websites. And their websites are, more often than not, about dating, intensive coupling, heteronormativity, and matrimania. As our real readers know, this is not what Onely is about.
So normally, we ignore the emails. Occasionally, we’ll send a kind but corrective reply. Although we always cringe, we generally take the high road, avoid the snark. We certainly don’t want to drag ya’ll into it.
But this time, we just can’t help ourselves. Christina forwarded me the following email with the comment “Oh, for god’s sake.” Why? Because at same time the solicitor is sharing links that prove he doesn’t read Onely, he also says that Onely is a sincere pleasure to read.
Hi Lisa,
We would love to share with you an article that we just posted on our own blog! “20 Best Blogs for College Dating Advice” (http://www.onlinecollegecourses.com/2011/07/12/20-best-blogs-for-college-dating-advice/) would be an interesting story for your readers to check out and discuss on your blog.
Either way, I hope you continue putting out great content through your blog. It has been a sincere pleasure to read.
Copious Readers, we wondered: What snarky response would you compose on our behalf? Here’s what we’ve come up with so far:
Dear College Dating Advice Guy: Are you sincerely reading now?
- LA
Facebook, Scourge of the Onelers, Part 2 May 8, 2011
Posted by Onely in Food for Thought, Heteronormativity, Just Saying., Pop Culture: Scourge of the Onelys, Singled Out, Take action, Your Responses Requested!.Tags: relationship status is inadequate, sign our facebook petition, stop the singlism
13 comments
Continued from this post…
Got your attention?
After Lisa conducted her Facebook experiment, we wondered, why is it that people can write anything they want on Facebook for their “religion” status, but not for relationship status?
It seemed an eminently reasonable question, so I posted an eminently reasonable article and petition on Change.org asking Facebook to tweak their script a tad. I’ve included excerpts from the article and petition here, along with some of the comments they generated. As you’ll see, on the niche topic of singles’ advocacy, what is eminently reasonable to one person may be hellfire-and-damnation to another, even in a community of supposedly progressive thinkers.
From the article: Tell Facebook “Relationships” Comprise More Than Just Sex Partners:
Facebook allows us to write whatever we want in our profile’s “Religion” box — even Peanut Butter Cups. So why, for our “Relationship,” must we choose from a pre-set list of nine choices: single; in a relationship; engaged; married; it’s complicated; in an open relationship; widowed; separated; and divorced? [Update: in February 2011 Facebook added two more relationship options: "in a civil union" and "in a domestic partnership.]
Facebook needs to make the Relationship status a write-in field. I at least want the option of flaunting of my relationships with my cat or my hairdresser. But there are serious, bigger problems at stake here.
By forcing users to choose one “relationship” from a narrow range of options centering around marital status and sexual habits, Facebook perpetuates our society’s entrenched mate-mania, which over-worships the sexual-couple-unit, and marriage in particular. This bias devalues other important relationships. It devalues platonic friends and non-spousal family members. And it devalues people for whom conventional coupling/marriage is either not appealing or not an option. . .
From the Petition:
Dear Mr. Zuckerberg and Mr. Heiliger,
Please make Relationship Status a write-in field, as you have done with the Religion option. Since 2007, at least six Facebook groups have formed to advocate for broader definitions of relationship on the site, yet Facebook still requires users to choose from a short pre-set list of choices centering around marital status and sexual habits.
Facebook’s current Relationship menu perpetuates our society’s entrenched mate-mania, which over-worships the sexual-couple-unit, and marriage in particular. Mate-mania is more than an irritating cultural quirk. It is actually codified into government policy. In the U.S. legal code over 1000 laws mention marital status, favoring married couples by a wide margin. This bias devalues other important relationships. It devalues platonic friends and non-spousal family members. And it devalues people for whom conventional coupling/marriage is either not appealing or not an option.
That’s not what Facebook is about. Facebook is about facilitating connections–all kinds of connections. . .
A word about Change.org: I wrote for them for a year and really enjoyed the experience. Change.org is a powerful and successful liberal forum advocating for social change on a range of important issues, from women’s rights to gay rights to animal rights to human rights to environmental protection, largely through the use of online petitions. Every day hundreds of thousands of change-minded, open-minded readers browse, comment on, and sign the petitions. The Change.org community prides itself on thinking outside the box and advancing the rights of the disenfranchised.
When I wrote the post, I imagined that Change.org’s progressive readers would appreciate my claim and respond in kind by signing the petition. Instead, the commentary was surprisingly negative, and only 200 readers signed the petition – even though the post and petition received more than 9,000 views. So why did it receive an overwhelmingly hostile response from commenters? Is it because they were unimaginative faux-progressives who only became liberals to piss off their right-wing parents or because they think they look good in Birkenstocks? Not at all. They cared deeply about other social issues, women’s rights in particular. In fact, they cared so deeply about women’s rights that a prime complaint about the petition was that it wasn’t feminist enough. Take for example the following two comments:
I think the cause of women’s rights needs to be taken seriously, and complaining about this type of stuff is a sure-fire way to lose points in the seriousness column.
I fail to see how that has to do with women’s rights, when that is affecting more than just women.
For people who haven’t yet thought critically about the cultural, governmental, and commercial biases toward couples, complaining about couple-mania is like complaining that the earth revolves around the sun. And why would anyone do that? Lisa commented on the article, explaining why Facebook’s relationship hangups were, in fact, a feminist issue:
The problem … has to do with the normalizing of romantic/sexual relationships as primary to a person’s identity. Because Facebook regulates the categories through which we define our online identities, it appears abnormal — and in the case of “relationship status,” impossible — to want to define one’s own identity according to our own terms, rather than Facebook’s. Thus, calling for a broadening of what “having a relationship” might mean — as Christina does here — appears abnormal to some.
Readers also challenged the article by saying that there are other (separate but seemingly equal) ways in Facebook through which you can link your status to friends/relatives/pets/etc, so they wondered why we needed to be able to do this in the “relationship” field. In response, Lisa explained why this was so, feeling rather startled that such an explanation would even be required for people who, judging from their participation in Change.org, would already have a basic understanding of the rhetoric of discrimination:
Facebook’s regulation of which relationships are “possible” or “intelligible” participates in unjust systems of thought and action that attempt to regulate one’s ability to be recognized in larger culture as an individual deserving of equal rights…. While one’s online identity on Facebook may not seem to matter all that much in a local/individual context, I’d argue that Facebook’s popularity means that when it regulates particular aspects of a user’s identity as “normal,” that regulation trickles into the thinking/actions of the general public.
As of April 9, 2011, the article had received 9,582 views since its inception in December 2010. Over 200 of those viewers signed the accompanying petition. And the other 9,000? Well, as we’ve seen, a number of them found the whole concept offensive. As is common with online petitions, a good proportion of the readers may have been too lazy, hurried, or cautious to hit the “sign” button and fill out their personal information (as I have often been). Regardless, almost 10,000 people now may think just a bit more critically when filling out their Facebook profiles.
– CC
New Years’ Resolutions — It’s Never Too Late! January 26, 2011
Posted by Onely in Food for Thought, single and happy, Your Responses Requested!.Tags: late new year, life transitions, new year's resolutions, thank goodness I'm single, welcoming uncertainty
18 comments
Yeah, yeah, whatever. Onely’s a little slow on the uptake. We’re 26 days past the new year already — duh! But given the maddening developments in my life since the *real* new year, I’m inclined to start from scratch and designate today, January 26th 2011, my official new year.
Since Christina and I began this blog, I’ve been enrolled in a wonderful doctoral program in Louisville, Kentucky. I have enjoyed constant support and intellectual engagement from my peers and mentors. I have grown in so many ways — as a person, as a teacher, as a scholar. In fact, it’s hard for me to imagine the development of Onely in any way separate from my journey in graduate school.
But my formal education is coming to a close — I’m set to graduate in May — and with that closure comes transition. The academic job market hasn’t been easy, and at this point I have no idea where I will be in six months, even in three. I have become comfortable with my life here, but I’ve also been looking forward to moving on and finding some security. I thought I’d be moving toward the ideal – an assistant professor position at a great university – and instead I find myself confronting the reality – the market is glutted with equally qualified candidates who have similar dreams, and I don’t have any control over how they compare to me.
Unfortunately, my “ideal” may not work out after all, and it’s been somewhat unsettling as I identify other “ideals.” The thing is, I’ve begun to remember that there are alternatives to what I thought I’d been aiming for this whole time — there are other “ideals.” Within this academic world I live in, you wouldn’t think there is anything to do but teach college students and publish lengthy papers in academic journals. In fact, that’s what I’ve basically assumed since beginning this program.
But that’s the culture of the academy, not of the world. And as I consider other paths, I’m reminded not only of who I was (what I believed, valued, desired) before this doctoral program, but how far I’ve come — not only professionally, but also personally. My original “self” is still intact; it’s just become a little more nerdy and a lot more satisfied. I’m beginning to wonder why I was dead-set on a particular future when, in fact, there could be many: I have this amazing degree (well, almost have it, knock on wood) and have accumulated years of teaching, research, writing, and editing experience — all of which can be used in new and exciting ways I couldn’t have predicted.
These last few weeks, as I’ve been rejected by institutions and people I unconsciously idealized for the last four years, I have begun to explore — and get excited about! — other options. Admittedly, it’s been difficult to explore these options without feeling like I’m somehow giving up or letting my colleagues down, and so I haven’t felt entirely open to this exploration, in spite of the fact that I keep returning to it. My conclusion: the process of letting go – even if it’s not permanent – is painful, no matter how rich the future promises to be.
So my late-January New Year’s resolution, official on January 26th, 2011, is as follows:
I welcome the uncertainty of the present and open my mind to whatever possibilities inhere in the future. After all, I could not have predicted them without letting go. And I could not be so welcoming if I were not Onely.
Copious Readers, what are your late- (or early!) January resolutions, and how will your Onely mindset help you maintain your resolve?
– Lisa
