The ever-beautiful, always-dutiful Sarah Hempel has been taking some flack for agreeing with me re: romance and dating. I think that Anonymous/II is rather missing the point when he/she/it says, "Not to be rude since I don't know you. It's just a little SCARY to think that a person might make other lists of criterion... After that first dinner date, one is told, "You were doing quite well on the list, but I'm so sorry to inform you -- you failed at number five.""

I don't think it's at all illegitimate to have criteria for people that you are dating. I think it's more than a little dishonest to represent that one doesn't have any criteria for people they are dating. Of course, I don't have a comments section, so Anonymous/II won't be able to unload his/her/its opinions on my weblog freely, but I will reproduce responsive emails. It's why I provide an email address. Of course, I will only publish those emails with the express permission of the sender.

But, to return to the issue at hand: fidelity in a relationship is quite important. It's the rare romance where people set out specifically to be unfaithful to the person that they are in the romance with. I can understand the issue of not wanting to spend your life with someone with whom the sex is unsatisfying, because sex is an important part of love/marriage; however, I think society has it backwards. Why not, and here's an idea, pursue sex with someone that you are in love with and to whom you have made a commitment before the sex?

I guess I'm old fashioned (an old-fashioned libertarian? How piquant!), but that's just the way I am.