Couplemania for Polyglots July 8, 2012
Posted by Onely in Food for Thought, Your Responses Requested!.Tags: paerchendiktatur, singles blog, unmarried in China, unmarried in Germany, 单身 歧视, 婚姻
11 comments
Copious Readers,
Here at Onely we often use the terms couplemania, matrimania, marital privileging, or heteronormativity to describe the act of favoring paired people at the expense of singles. (Heteronormativity often refers to an anti-gay attitude where the perpetrator thinks that the male-female couple complex is superior to–or more normal than–a same sex couple complex, but the term also applies when favoring any couple complex over a single person.)
But in the interest of going global with our mission, we wondered: how would one say these things in other languages? We were first drawn to this idea by fellow blogger and fellow Oneler Rachel, of Rachel’s Musings. She taught us that couplemania in German is Pärchendiktatur (literally–and rather obviously–“pair dictatorship”).
Even better is the Mandarin Chinese phrase for matrimania: 婚姻 狂热, or “marriage fanaticism”.
(In case our non-Chinese-speaking readers want to challenge matrimania on their vacation to Beijing–probably not recommended–we present this handy pronunciation guide: hun1yin1 kuang2re4, where 1 is a high tone, 2 is a rising tone, and 4 is a sharp downward tone, as you might use when saying, “No! I do not care if I don’t have a husband/wife/boyfriend/girlfriend/date.”)
We also figured out how to say “singlism” in Chinese: 单身 歧视, literally “single-person discrimination” (dan1shen1 qi2shi4).
We got our Chinese translations from the groundbreaking book Singled Out by social scientist and singles advocate Bella DePaulo, PhD, who coined the original English terms. (Yes, Singled Out has been translated into Chinese!) But we need you, Copious Readers, to help us with our collection. Can you give us non-English versions of our favorite words? If you speak another language but don’t know the correct word for matrimania, or singlism, or marital privilege, or heteronormativity, then just make one up!
Thanks, Danke, 谢谢，
Christina (and Lisa)
Photo credit: David Rumsey
Attack of the Heteronormative Turtle Keepers! June 27, 2012
Posted by Onely in Food for Thought, Onely B*tchslaps Mother Nature.Tags: animal marriage, austrian giant turtles, galapagos, heteronormative, heteronormativity sucks, lonesome george, mother nature not heteronormative, singles blog, turtle sex, turtles can be single and happy
2 comments
We here at Onely feel confident that you have never seen a blog post with this title. But get used to it. Heteronormative turtle keepers (HTKs) are in the news lately. They’re trying to impose their couple-centric worldviews onto their amphibian friends, and no one (except us) questions whether the HTKs are out of their minds–least of all the media, who love this stuff:
Some turtles “divorce,” others are “lonesome” – at least according to two news stories that have been published over the last month. First, Bibi and Poldi, giant turtles at an Austrian zoo, are apparently getting a “divorce” after 115 years together. Beirut’s The Daily Star laments:
The world’s oldest marriage looks like it has come to an end.
What’s more:
Management at the Austrian zoo in Klagenfurt tried everything – from couples’ counseling to feeding them romantic mood food to getting them to play games together, but to no avail.
Which begs the question, What the hell constitutes romantic turtle mood food, and where can we get some for our. . . uh, never mind. It also begs the question, Why must the media and keepers anthropomorphize these poor turtles? Actually, what the articles have done is dizzyingly weird, albeit great Onely fodder: they’ve created a misrepresentation within a misrepresentation. These stories attribute arbitrary human habits to turtles (lonesome, divorced) and then within that paradigm they tack on stereotypes about those human habits (single=lonesome, divorced=worse than married).
Man-made heteronormativity is bad enough – surely we don’t have to infect Mother Nature too? Despite their caretakers’ not-at-all-bizarre behavior, Bibi and Poldi never did reunite, nor even play games. As the saying goes, Turtles that play together, stay together. Obviously Bibi and Poldi didn’t try hard enough to keep the spark alive. Now all the other (coupled) turtles in the zoo will be saying that (now single) BiBi is irresponsible with tons of free time, and that (now single) Poldi can’t commit and eats TV dinners while standing up at the kitchen counter (not always a bad thing, in our opinion). (more…)
Onely Gets Stood Up, Resorts to Machinery June 18, 2012
Posted by Onely in Bad Onely Activities, Dating.Tags: cleaning, getting stood up, love dramas, singles blog, vacuum cleaner
5 comments
My mom set us up, so I should have known the date wouldn’t turn out well. To be fair to my mom, I did ask her to find me someone. And when she described Robin over the phone, Robin sounded amazing and I couldn’t wait to meet her. The whole week my stomach filled with happy butterflies I looked forward to Saturday at 2 pm.
Saturday arrives. At 1:50 I move my car so Robin can pull up right in front of house when she arrives. At 1:55 I start to pace by the window. At 2:00 I make sure the ringer on my phone is on in case she tries to call to say she’s running late. By 2:15 I’m pacing faster, in ever more erratic circles. By 2:30 I begin to worry: Do I really want a relationship with this woman if she can’t even call to say she’s running late? Is she a chronic late person? Because I could never be with a chronic late person. My butterflies settle into the pit of my stomach, a soggy cocoon of disappointment.
At 2:45 I call her. “Oh I’m so sorry,” she says. She doesn’t sound sorry. She sounds distracted. “I’m in Silver Spring.” This is a forty minute drive from me. She says, “I got caught up and didn’t realize the time.”
I’m opening my mouth to tell her not to bother coming now, when she says, “My longtime client had a fire in her nursing home and I’m trying to clean that up. Smoke damage. Can we reschedule our consultation?”
“Oh,” I say. “That’s too bad. Of course we can.” But I’m really thinking, Oh, the old fire-in-the-nursing-home-excuse. What about *my* estimate for a vacuuming job? What about the tumblefurs flying across my hardwood floors, clinging to the feet of my chairs, and sticking to my newly-moisturized face?
Robin lives in my neighborhood, so she says, “I’ll be home around six. Call me tonight and I’ll come over and give you an estimate for your vaccuuming.” She seems unfazed about having missed our 2pm date, and I wonder whether she would have even called me if I hadn’t called her first. That’s how it always is for me in relationships–I give, give, give and the other person takes, takes, takes. I curl up for a nap and rock myself to sleep through the tears.
At 7pm I wake up and call Robin. When her machine picks up I try to sound breezy, as if I don’t need her (more…)
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
5 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?
Do Couples Tell Stupider Stories? May 9, 2012
Posted by Onely in Everyday Happenings.Tags: boring stories, couple stories, singles blog
7 comments
Copious Readers, Lisa and I have been away for a long time. We’ve missed you and are slowly getting back into the blogging groove. Our absence is due in part to a big project we were working on that, for a while, was sucking our will to live (or at least to write). But we’ve recovered and are now ready to start flinging our opinions around again here on Onely. And so, without further ado:
I know that in the past when I’ve been “in a relationship“, I did ridiculous stuff that I probably wouldn’t or couldn’t have done had I been single (like ditching Emmy Lou Harris tickets to attend a hockey game). But did I tell stories that were stupid, pointless, and boring? Or more accurately, did I tell stories that were even more stupid, pointless, and boring than my usual ones?
I’ve been noticing that a lot of couples do tell stupid, pointless, and boring stories, at least more often than single people I’ve known. Now, the particular couples of whom I am about to speak are all my friends. I love and respect them. Individually, they’ve told me some hilarious tales of navigating the untamed wilderness of Northern Virginia. But sit them down together at the table or on the couch or in the car, and let the inane blatherings begin.
We know that people in love are giddy and blind about their significant other (at least in certain stages of love). I will deconstruct this phenomenon one step further: When we’re in love we are giddy and blind about any story in which our partner plays a part, regardless of how banal the scene, how devoid of narrative arc or character development. Result? Really boring stories.
Lest you think, “Surely she exaggerates!” I present to you the First Example:
Setting: A sushi restaurant.
Characters: Stan, Jan, and your intrepid Onely correspondent. Jan stares at the menu, undecided.
Stan: Maybe you should just get the grilled cheese sandwich.
Jan looks up and Stan and they both crack up.
Onely: . . .
Stan (still chuckling, looking at Onely): I made her a grilled cheese sandwich this afternoon.
Jan (laughing and shaking her head): Because I was hungry.
Stan: Yes, she was hungry. I asked her if she was hungry and she said yes.
Jan (eyes wide): Because I hadn’t eaten since breakfast!
Stan: And it was already three in the afternoon!
Onely (searching for a response that would show polite enthusiasm for this bland story without seeming so enthusiastic as to mock it): Really . . . since breakfast?
Jan: Oh yes. So he made me a grilled cheese sandwich. It was good.
Stan: Yeah, it was.
At this point, I was beginning to think “making a grilled cheese sandwich” must be a kind of metaphor for. . . well for something more interesting than that story, anyway. Either that, or my friends were insane.
Second example:
Setting: An office.
Characters: Recently-married Joe and your intrepid Onely correspondent. Joe perches on your intrepid correspondent’s not-so-intrepid cubicle desk.
Joe: Yes, I’m tired this morning too. Sara and I stayed up watching back-to-back episodes of Thirty-Rock on Netflix.
Onely: I love that show!
Joe: We were sitting there and I was like, “We should go to bed,” and Sara was like, “Honey, I know,” but then we just kept sitting there and Rooter [the dog] was lying across our laps asleep. So I said, “Well, babe, we can’t just wake him up,” and so we watched another three episodes. That happens a lot. Rooter likes to lie across both our laps. It’s ok because we like to stay up watching shows and laughing. Sara likes Parks and Recreation more than Thirty Rock so lately we’ve been flipping coins to see what we watch. Then we go to bed but she usually goes upstairs first because she needs longer in the bathroom so I stay with Rooter and flip through more programs.
***
Now, I recognize that a large part of friendship is listening to, learning from, and coming to appreciate the day-to-day detritus of our friends’ lives (and they to our own). However, try this exercise: Imagine Stan from Example One telling the same story about how he made a grilled cheese sandwich for his coworker Duane. Or Joe from Example Two discussing how he and his elderly neighbor hung out watching Thirty Rock. Wouldn’t happen. At least not with the excruciating detail and pacing I’ve described above. Because the listeners would never tolerate that, as storytellers are well aware. (And you know that sh&t would never fly if it were me getting all dramatic about the day I made my cat a grilled cheese sandwich.)
So when coupled people tell boring stories, why do we–and by “we”, I mean “I”–put up with them? I don’t know. Politeness. Desire not to hurt a friend. A fear that maybe the story is really very exciting and that I just don’t “get” it because I’m not insightful enough–or coupled enough.
–Christina
Photo Credit: frikipix
(Photo Fun Fact: Search for “couple” on Google Images Advanced Search Labelled for Reuse and this is the *second* photo in the results list.)
Onely Commits Heteronormativity (Again) April 5, 2012
Posted by Onely in Food for Thought, Heteronormativity.Tags: couples hypnotism, heteronormative, single faux pas, singles blog
8 comments
I’m beginning to worry I’m a subconscious heteronormahole, one of those annoying people who frame everything in the world in a hetero couple matrix. Regular readers will recall that in the past I’ve made unintentionally singlist or heteronormative remarks about housing and parenting.
Well, folks, I did it again. Recently I saw a hypnotist for assistance with handling medical issues, but as you know these guys are famous–in TV world at least–for dredging up all sorts of nastiness from the subconscious. Even. . . heteronormativity in a woman who has spent her blogging career railing against couple-maniacs and calling them names?
What happened was: The hypnotist sat me in a fluffy recliner. To the right of me was a matching fluffy recliner. In the tiny room, the recliners were the centerpiece and the empty chair to the right of me was very close and very obvious.
“Why do you have two chairs here?” I asked, after the session. I was groggy. (After all, I had just spent fifteen minutes being told to relax and visualize happy stuff. ) “Why? Do you hypnotize couples together? Like therapy?”
“No.” She gave me the same look I would have given myself, had I been completely lucid. “Sometimes friends want to do it together. Often coworkers. Not so much couples, at least not for therapy.”
Of course. Why would two chairs automatically suggest a couple to me? Why wouldn’t any number of other combinations of peoplehood want to try hypnosis together? Copious Readers, what would you have thought if you’d seen two chairs close side by side in a small dim hypnotist’s office?
–Christina
Photo credit: the-hypnotic.blogspot.com
STFU Redbook: I’m Single and I’m Going to Vegas! March 24, 2012
Posted by Onely in solo travel, STFU.Tags: redbook, single travel, singles blog, singlism, solo travel
13 comments
I had always considered Redbook just one step above an inflight magazine. Now I’ve downgraded it to a ranking underneath inflight magazines but above the backs of cereal boxes (except for Kashi cereal boxes; those are still several steps above Redbook). But Why? Why do we at Onely want Redbook to STFU?
Because this month’s issue has an article titled “Your perfect hotel finder!” which I eagerly picked up while waiting for my dermatologist. (Perfect skin to go with my perfect hotel!) The article was organized spreadsheet-style, with a column on the left delineating exciting locations: New York!–LA!–Chicago!–Las Vegas! and for each location there was a row of different hotel options: Magic Castle Hotel!–Terranea Resort! And (the dreamiest-sounding) Acqualina Resort and Spa on the Beach! The hotels options were themselves organized in columns, according to who you were travelling with: If You’re Bringing Your Kids!–If You’re Doing the Couple Thing!–If You’re Travelling Solo!
HAHA just kidding. There was no If You’re Travelling Solo! option. My eyes scanned across the Kids and Couple options looking for a Single Travellers column, but they just kept scanning right right right into the inner fold of the magazine.
That’s right, no Acqualina Spa for me, because I don’t have a kids or chronic sex partner to travel with. Probably I should write Redbook a polite but indignant letter educating them about the increasing solo traveller demographic. But I would rather just go get a wine cooler from my bathtub and sit on my back stoop in an inflatable baby pool, as single people do because there are no hotels for us.
–Christina
Photo credit: Fotopedia, Mnadi Sheraton Miramar Resort, Egypt
STFU Glenn Grothman, or Should We Say–Glenn Gross, Man. March 6, 2012
Posted by Onely in As If!.Tags: glenn grothman, glenn grothman single parents, Republican Senators who should be fed to the crocodiles, single mothers
7 comments
Normally we at Onely avoid using rhetorical fallacies like name-calling to make our point. But right now we have an absurd crisis on our hands, so we must say–screw our rhetorical principles.
The dungwipe nit-brained waste of quarks Republican (of course) Senator Glen Grothman of Wisconsin wants to pass a bill “requiring the Child Abuse and Neglect Prevention Board to emphasize nonmarital parenthood as a contributing factor to child abuse and neglect.”
Yes, single parents are abusing their children just by being single. Better they should marry whoever they can find and spend their lives screaming at each other over the heads of their non-abused children. That’s what Glenn Gross, Man thinks, anyway.
And here’s the worst part: Gross, Man is himself single. Way to hit one for the home team, buddy.
You can read more about what a narrow-minded slushflinger he is here or here.
Ok, Copious Readers. Here is the Senator’s contact information. Call or email and tell him that Onely hopes he chokes on his Senate Bill 507, An Act to amend 48.982 (2) (g) 2., 48.982 (2) (g) 4. and 48.982 (2) (gm) of the statutes; relating to: requiring the Child Abuse and Neglect Prevention Board to emphasize nonmarital parenthood as a contributing factor to child abuse and neglect. You can also sign this petition on Change.org.
Here is a list of members of the Wisconsin Senate Committee of Public Health, Human Services, and Revenue, to whom this socially-repressed goon submitted his pathetic attempt at legislation. We can contact them as well.
If you know anyone in that pigheaded mulch-snorter’s home state of Wisconsin, tell them to contact his office as well. Then please report back here at Onely and let us know how it went: (more…)
Going Solo–With the Rest of Society (a book review) February 28, 2012
Posted by Onely in book review.Tags: Eric Klinenberg, Going Solo, Going solo book review, living alone, rise of single living
4 comments
Eric Klinenberg. Going Solo: The Extraordinary Rise and Surprising Appeal of Living Alone. The Penguin Press, 2012.
I began my exploration of the world’s first singleton societies with an eye for their most dangerous and disturbing features, including selfishness, loneliness, reclusiveness, and the horrors of getting sick or dying alone.
A singlist statement like this one would normally make us here at Onely ululate and tear at our hair. However, it’s hard to fault Eric Klinenberg for his honesty or his preconceived notion of solo living. After all, in 2002 he had just written Heat Wave: A Social Autopsy of Disaster in Chicago, a book about the hundreds of people who died in 1995 when the heat index hovered for days in the low 100s. Most of the victims lived alone. Their tragedies informed the CDC’s list of risk factors for heat wave victims:
Living alone, not leaving home daily, lacking access to transportation, being sick or bedridden, not having social contacts nearby, and of course not having an air conditioner.
But in Klinenberg’s new book, he discovered that
. . . singletons have helped revitalize the public life of cities, because they are more likely than those who live with others to spend time with friends and neighbors, to frequent bars, cafes, and restaurants, and to participate in informal social activities as well as civic groups. (230)
Going Solo: The Extraordinary Rise and Surprising Appeal of Living Alone examines and celebrates this relatively new social trend. Klinenberg uses the term “singletons” to mean people who live alone, as opposed to “singles”, who may or may not be socially single (eg. unmarried/unpartnered) and who may or may not live alone. We at Onely like this distinction and will be using “singleton” in the same way henceforth on this blog.
In his engaging text sprinkled with statistics, Klinenberg touts the benefits of living alone, tramples stereotypes about the selfish, rotting singleton, and profiles some of the heavy-hitters in the field of singles’ rights, such as the Alternatives to Marriage Project. Yet despite all the praise of this lifestyle, the book never loses sight of the fact that right now, in our current society, living alone is generally only an option for the very privileged–or the very woebetrodden.
The most important parts of this book (but make no mistake, the entire book is important) are those which acknowledge the latter: the poor, frail, ill, and/or isolated folks who die in heat waves (for example). The goal is not to deride them, or the practice of living alone. In fact, by asking How can we prevent underprivileged singletons from succumbing to the dangers of living alone?, Klinenberg is actually saying, Living alone is such a valuable experience, how can we allow more people to have it safely? Or in his own words: (more…)
Single’s Movement Has a Slogan! February 20, 2012
Posted by Onely in Heteronormativity, Take action.Tags: single and happy, singles blog, singles discrimination, singles movement, singles slogan, singlism
4 comments
Copious Readers, let us know what you think of this for our Singles’ movement slogan (if I may be so bold):
Separate sex and state!
Advantage: If you pronounce it SeparAYTE, it has rhyme and rhythm.
Disadvantage: Some people might read it as SeparUT.
Advantage: It has “sex” in it.
Disadvantage: It has “sex” in it.
As our regular readers will recognize, the slogan reflects how many governments give arbitrary rights and privileges to married couples, at the expense of gays who cannot marry and, less famously, at the expense of single people. Yes, some companies or governments think of themselves as all progressive for providing some domestic partner benefits, but in doing so they’re just feeding back into the whole overdone trope of couple-privileging.
Moreover, “couple” is largely by default defined as two people who live together and have sex with each other on a regular basis. This prevents, or at least deters, two platonic females (for example) who live together, maybe share childcare responsibilities, and function as a married couple in all ways but one–dare I whip out the Kate & Allie reference? I do dare–from receiving or applying for domestic partner benefits.
This is why we think Separate sex from state is an appropriate slogan for progressive singles. Separate sex from state, and many other cultural prejudices about singles (selfish, lonely, always seeking “the one”) will fall away as well.
–Christina
P.S. If you watch the Kate & Allie episode, aired in 1984, you’ll see how they float the idea of “family can be defined many ways.” Yet over twenty years later, so many people (and institutions) are still acting as if the hetero couple unit is the be-all end-all of family. Shameful.
Onely.Org 