Which Amy The Advice Columnist Does Your Paper Run?
A reader sent the same question to Amy Dickinson and me (the one in mine has a bit more detail because I corresponded with the reader at length, as I often do, to find out more, while the other Amy ran what we both got the first time).
Here's mine, Gilbert Grope:
I met a nice man (so I thought) who lives about 40 miles away. On our second date, we had drinks in my neighborhood. He drank too much, and asked to hang at my house so he wouldn't drive under the influence. I didn't like this because I'm used to guys using this ploy for sex, but he said if I didn't let him in, I was making him drive drunk. I grudgingly allowed him in, and he immediately started making moves on me. Eventually, I tried to send him home, but he said he was still in no position to drive, so I kicked him out early in the morning. What were my obligations here? Every man I asked said I shouldn't have risked letting him in. As one said, "Better a strange drunk on the road than a strange drunk in your home, where he could rape you." I have yet to ask a woman who can give me a definitive answer; they're all as conflicted as I am.--Manhandled
If a stranger comes to your door and says, "I'm too drunk to drive home," you don't say, "No problem, I'll make up the bed!" Yet, this guy's a near stranger, one you didn't want in your home -- even before he took the post-date sex ploy to a remarkable new low. Yeah, forget the usual lame lemme-in tactics like "I'd love to meet that cat I've heard so much about!" or "Mind if I use your bathroom?" No, it's "Mind if I cause the fiery death of a family of five?"
A guy might present you with an either/or situation, but that doesn't mean those are your only choices. In this case, you should've told the guy to cab it to a motel. (To borrow from your friend, "Better a strange drunk cabbing to Motel 6 than a strange drunk turning your home into Motel Sex.") If your date insists on driving drunk, call the cops, report a drunk driver, and give them a description of his car. Of course, it's possible he isn't really drunk, just trying to con his way in, but that's for the cop who stops him to determine: "I can touch my finger to my nose just fine, Officer, but I'm having real problems getting my hand up a girl's shirt."
It isn't surprising that all your girlfriends are "conflicted" about what you should've done. In fact, other women would have given in like you did -- not necessarily because they're weak or dumb, but because they're women: the gender that evolved to be the nurturers, peacemakers, and consensus builders of the species. (All great until a drunk guy swinging a set of car keys is standing at your front door.)
Recognizing that, as a woman, you have a hardwired tendency to be a pleaser is the best way to avoid succumbing to it. You have to decide before you're in a dicey situation that your comfort level and safety take priority over possibly coming across as rude or unsympathetic. Keep in mind, as Gavin de Becker writes in The Gift of Fear, that "'No' is a complete sentence," and if you let somebody talk you out of it, "you might as well wear a sign that reads, 'You are in charge.'" Get his book, start a reading group with your "conflicted" girlfriends, and in the future, see to it that your door policy is determined by you, not Jim Beam and Captain Morgan.
Here's hers -- asking for suggestions from readers!
I recently met a very nice man who lives about 40 miles from me. We had a very nice date and he was a perfect gentleman. I eagerly accepted a second date with him, in my town. He drank more than he should have. As we drew the evening to a close, he asked if he could hang at my house for a while so he wouldn't drive under the influence. I did not like this, but if I said no that meant I could be putting him on the road to, at best, get a DWI or, at worst, kill someone. (I don't know how intoxicated he was; he seemed fine to me.) Against my better judgment, I allowed him to come to my home, where he immediately tried to become intimate with me. I did try to send him home, but he said he still was in no position to drive. I allowed him to stay and kicked him out in the early morning. I want to know - what are my moral obligations in this situation? Do I tell him to drive home, make him sleep in his car (which means he'll drive home) or allow him to sleep on my couch (which puts my safety in danger)?
WONDERINGYou are morally obligated to protect your own personal safety. You are also obligated to do your best to protect others'.
You should never, never let someone into your home because you've been pressured to do so.
If someone claims to be too drunk to drive, you should believe him - regardless of how he seems to you.
If you're not able to call a cab to take him to his home (ask the restaurant manager about a taxi service), I'd suggest letting him sleep in his car with you holding the keys. You could then deliver the keys along with a cup of coffee in the morning and send him on his way.
I'll run other suggestions from readers.
I looked at a few of Amy Dickinson's columns. Not bad, I guess. She doesn't appear to cover the same kind of ground as the Advice Goddess, though. And, judging from the absence of comments, she doesn't seem to have built up much readership yet.
old rpm daddy at July 7, 2010 10:00 AM
Wow. I can't believe some people! If I were in the same situation the answer is crystal clear. I would never allow them in my home! If he's too drunk to drive that's his own damn problem and should figure out how to fend for himself. It's not my job to look after him or be responsible for him. Common sense tells you that if you go out somewhere away from home you'll need to return there, which means keeping a lid on the drinking or making sure you have the number of a cab company and cab fare. And really, what is wrong with the stupid woman? I don't allow people I barely know into my house, let alone ones that have been drinking. The fact that she even had to think about before making completely the wrong choice totally disturbs me. She completely set herself up to be a victim, but had something happened it clearly would have been everyone else's fault with no help from her. *rolls eyes*
BunnyGirl at July 7, 2010 10:07 AM
I actually read both columns and realized that it was the same letter writer. I appreciate your follow-up before weighing in.
@old rpm daddy I think the Advice Goddess column is different from other columns. She welcomes (and responds) to readers comments regularly. She invites public comments. I think Amy Dickinson probably receives enough commentary, but more likely privately than publicly. She also runs a once-a-week free for all advice write in, where she answers questions on the spot: an example here: http://www.slate.com/id/2259711/
Nicole G at July 7, 2010 10:44 AM
This line sticks with me, "You are also obligated to do your best to protect others."
No, I most certainly am not when it imposes upon my obligation to protect myself. Calling a taxi seems like the best idea. Second, if I have regulated my own drinking, why can't I give him a ride home myself?
It seems unbelievable to me that the women she talked to have been so brainwashed that they can't say no to protect their own safety.
Cat at July 7, 2010 11:27 AM
Nicole, you are linking to the "Dear Prudence" column in Slate (which I also like), not to Amy Dickinsons'. I haven't read Dickinson's column, but from her answer to the letter writer, I think I'll stick to Amy Alkon :)
I have always admired Amy Alkon's lengthy, thoughtfull (yet humorous) responses. I think this shows a lot of respect towards her advice seekers. I find it incredible, the way some columnists publish large messages with very serious problems from very troubled people, only to answer threeliners with lousy advices. I don't always agree with Amy, but I consider her one of the best advice columnists.
Mexicanita at July 7, 2010 11:34 AM
Amy Dickinson is in my local paper, the Chicago Tribune, and online there are usually tons of comments with her column. Most of the comments are negative toward her advice. I don't hate her like some readers seem to, but she is certainly no Amy Alkon.
Fink-Nottle at July 7, 2010 12:16 PM
@Nicole G: As Mexecanita points out, that was the Dear Prudence site you linked to, which I'd never looked at before, so thanks for the link! Kind of a fun read, especially the comments, though some of them sound a little, well, youngish, I guess. Can't say why for sure.
As far as Amy Dickinson goes, I noticed that the comment form was there, but none of the three or four columns I looked at had any comments. From what Fink-Nottle said above, I guess the comment form was a local one, and maybe she hadn't caught on in that market yet or something.
old rpm daddy at July 7, 2010 12:27 PM
I welcome comments on my column, but I sure don't expect readers to give the advice. I do a lot of thinking and homework for every column. I think that's what you owe readers.
This particular answer comes out of years of study of evolutionary psych research. I think explaining the likely reason so many women behave in ways antithetical to their safety and what makes them comfortable will help women behave in ways that will keep them safer. I felt particularly good about putting that together, and it seemed to help the woman who wrote (I corresponded with her even after it was published).
Amy Alkon at July 7, 2010 1:27 PM
Amy D is in my local paper. I find her to be consistently sound & levelheaded in her advice.
In this particular case, her advice & yours are pretty much the same. The delivery is a little different.
As for asking readers for suggestions, that's a common feature of advice columns in the legacy media - you do the same, implicitly, by having a comments section.
You are the more entertaining & provocative Amy. I think, however, that she might be the wiser Amy.
harmon at July 7, 2010 6:30 PM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2010/07/07/which_amy_the_a.html#comment-1730444">comment from harmonWhat I wrote and what she wrote are anything but the same. If you think so, I'm not surprised you think she might be "the wiser Amy."
You don't bring a guy who's behaved coercively to you a cup of coffee, nor do you try take away his keys or continue any sort of involvement with him.
If you're a woman, I hope you'll read some Gavin de Becker, and even if you're not, you probably should.
Telling a woman "you should never, never let someone into your home because you've been pressured to do so" is something this woman already knows -- but she did it anyway. I know this because I corresponded with her at length. This was interesting to me because this was not some pushover of a woman with toilet-level self-worth...quite the contrary. Note what she said about her female friends and male friends when I kept asking her for further information. That's telling. Hence my advice.
Good advice takes into account human nature and how people behave in the real world and why. This requires thought and research -- more than lazy Amy Dickinson usually or ever seems willing to do.
Amy Alkon at July 7, 2010 7:01 PM
You are morally obligated to protect your own personal safety. You are also obligated to do your best to protect others'...
But not at the expense of your own. The personal safety of a guy you've just met who's drunk and trying to coerce a sleepover does not trump your personal safety. At that point, I'd be more worried about the safety of others on the road with the guy, hence Amy's advice about calling the police on him if he insists on driving drunk. He doesn't have to drive, hence Amy's advice about calling a cab to take him to a motel for the night. You owe nothing to a man who, as Lobster pointed out in the comments on the column, knew he was forty miles from home and got drunk anyway.
Taking his keys is more involvement than you should have because it still puts the choice in your hands. You do not need to have control over any part of this guy's behavior. He is the one that decides if he drives drunk, and he is the one who will answer to the police when you call the cops on him like you told him you would. Tell him straight up that he either calls a cab (or a friend) to pick him up or you call the police on him for driving drunk. Then go through with it.
I also have to ask why harmon thinks Amy D is the wiser Amy. What are the specifics there? I'm not saying she's wrong about things (I often agree in principle), but she always seems wishy-washy. And her answers always seem a bit lacking in detail. Maybe the editors want her to keep it short, but I vastly prefer Amy A's specific and detailed answers.
NumberSix at July 7, 2010 8:04 PM
"...but he said if I didn't let him in, I was making him drive drunk."
Full stop. No other info needed. Anyone who says this with a straight face who is an adult needs to be dropped like a hot potato. My recommended reply to this would be "No fucking way, and lose my number."
Also the correct move is to ask to use the bathroom after you walk her home, and THEN you make your move!
Scott at July 7, 2010 8:19 PM
Also Amys blog comments pages are up almost a month after the publication date, not the day of
lujlp at July 8, 2010 5:32 AM
I disagree that Amy Dickinson's column is usually sound and levelheaded. I find she has a mushheaded tendency toward forgiveness-advocating in situations wherein it doesn't seem warranted. Also, her attitude toward minors and alcohol seems to be "OMG A SIP WILL HARM THEM!!!" Ah well-- ymmv.
Melissa G at July 8, 2010 6:12 AM
The other Amy's advice was idiotic - I'm obligated to take care of a grown man who can't hold his booze?! LOL! Someone behaving as that guy did needs to be told where to go. A grown man should be able to get himself home or find somewhere to sober up a bit. Those pressure tactics would piss me right off and that would be the end of my charitable urge, not to mention that would be the last date he'd have with me. LAME.
"If you don't let me in, you're making me drive drunk."
"You got yourself drunk, if you drive, that's on you. Good night."
Thag Jones at July 8, 2010 1:04 PM
No, Amy, it's the same advice: "Don't let the guy into your house." The rest of it is details - you say cab him to a motel, she says cab him home. You say call the cops, she says take away the keys.
I think Amy D is focusing on the facts as given in the letter, while you are focusing on the possibilities inherent in this kind of situation.
Judging from what actually occurred, this turned out to be just a guy who had too much to drink & got amorous. Evidently he wound up taking "no" for an answer. That's not unusual, and it doesn't make him a terrible human being. That's where Amy D is coming from.
On the other hand, the situation could well have been different, & Mr. Nice Guy on the Second Date could have raped her. That's what you are addressing.
So you are each giving your secondary advice based on different premises - but, as I said, you agree on the main advice to keep him out of the house.
NumberSix - Wisdom. Well, for starters, a person who is willing to entertain suggestions from her readers is probably a little wiser than someone who puts her down for doing that.
harmon at July 8, 2010 10:50 PM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2010/07/07/which_amy_the_a.html#comment-1731111">comment from harmonIt's anything but the same advice. You don't try to take the keys of a coercive drunk, just for starters. You don't bring him a cup of coffee in the morning -- you don't have anything else to do with him. Dickinson is doing exactly what I laid out in the column -- being overly sympathetic to somebody she shouldn't be, without the first clue as to why, since she has all the insight of the average lady who lives next door to any one of us.
Most guys are not rapists. But, you don't behave in a way that's antithetical to your safety or your comfort level -- although as a woman you will probably be more prone to behave against your best interest in these ways than a man would...for the reasons I stated in the column. Understanding that is what helps you steel yourself to act in your best interest and not let your sympathy get the best of you.
I'm focusing on the facts given in the letter(s) since I generally write to people for further information, which I did. I also give advice for the real world, for real people, based on how real humans behave. That's why I rarely tell people to get out of relationships; instead, I make it very, very apparent that they're behaving like idiots by laying their behavior out for them. This is my version of "motivational interviewing." Stanton Peele, the addiction treatment specialist, told me that my column is a better motivator precisely because it’s written in metaphor and humor. In his words, “You don’t get people to change by telling them what to do.” You help them do it “by assisting them…to sort the information out in their own minds, so they can make sense of it on their own.”
My favorite from your piece was this: "Well, for starters, a person who is willing to entertain suggestions from her readers is probably a little wiser than someone who puts her down for doing that."
That's from the "so and so's opinion is worth as much as the next person's" school of lettuce-headed thinking. It's PC nonthink.
Then again, if her readers are just as valuable as advice givers as she is then you're making the point that she's not worth much. Me? I think I have a little more to offer in the human nature department than the average person -- maybe because I'm naturally good at understanding people, as man people are, but also because I work my ass off at it.
As I've been doing annually since 2001, I just went to Oregon for the annual Human Behavior and Evolution Society Conference where I heard, just for one, David Buss presenting on the evolution of stalking:
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2010/06/19/the_evolution_o.html
Do you think Amy Dickinson will post on the difference in the female cycle of desire -- or has ever heard of such a thing or of Dr. Rosemary Basson? Here's a bit on her from a column I wrote in 2006 -- three years before The New York Times and other popular press discovered her work:
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2006/09/26/groping_for_mor.html
Before I started going to scientific conferences and reading science journals, I mowed through the entire works of psychology, was very influenced by the late Albert Ellis, who respected my thinking and told me not to bother going to school to get a Masters or Ph.D. (he's the founder of cognitive behavioral therapy with Aaron Beck), and I have an epidemiologist kick my ass about how to read studies and discern flaws from minor enough flaws (all studies are flawed -- some are just more flawed than others).
I had respect for Ann Landers, who I met before she died, and I respect Hara Estroff Marano from Psych Today and the Playboy advice columnist, Chip Rowe. I don't just dis anyone who's an advice columnist. But, I find Amy Dickinson lazy and and a boring thinker, and in that, I think she does a disservice to her readers.
PS Because I'm a nerd and this is what nerds do for relaxation at night, and because I think a young researcher feels bad -- I did a little analysis of why her study is getting trashed in the press. I'll post it here.
Amy Alkon at July 9, 2010 12:38 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2010/07/07/which_amy_the_a.html#comment-1731112">comment from harmonOh, and harmon, why do you post under two different names on my site? A few hours prior, you used a different name, and then you were harmon prior to that. And prior to that, it was the other name.
Amy Alkon at July 9, 2010 12:42 AM
Well, I think Amy pretty well covered it, but I have to also respond to the comment that Amy D is wiser for entertaining comments from her readers.
I do think that any advice columnist available on the internet should have a comments section. However, using said comments section as a substitute for further research or advice is lazy. That's my problem with Amy D. I don't think she's wrong most of the time, but her columns tend to be wishy-washy in regard to the actual advice. For instance, in the column in question, she says that a person is morally obligated to protect herself. Then she says that said person is also morally obligated to protect others' personal safety. To which I responded above-- not at the expense of your own. She makes a statement that sounds definitive and then buys it back.
And if the LW wanted a poll of average people, she wouldn't have written in. In the letter she says she asked many of her friends, both men and women. She, like most, I'm guessing, wrote to advice columnists because they specialize in advice. They are submitting themselves as better than the average person in the field. By the way, there are several advice columnists that I read and enjoy who solicit and publish reader suggestions, but I don't consider them lazy like I do Amy D.
I see no reason to take control of the personal safety of a grown man who chose to get drunk forty miles from home on your second date. It's not even just about rape or violence. My bedroom door has a lock on it, but, as I said in the comments on the column, I wouldn't let a drunk, belligerent acquaintance of either gender sleep over. I'm not sleeping with a relative stranger in my house, much less a relative stranger who tried to guilt me into a sleepover by promising the fiery deaths of other people.
NumberSix at July 9, 2010 1:40 AM
I like Amy D's column, but I view it as very different from yours. She's more like a friend you'd sit over coffee and discuss a problem with. I don't feel she presents herself as an expert on human behavior, which is why she often asks readers to weigh in. She's funny, at times, but not as funny as you.
The letter she received seems somewhat watered down compared to the one you received. The guy comes off as nicer and less threatening.
lovelysoul at July 9, 2010 6:19 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2010/07/07/which_amy_the_a.html#comment-1731178">comment from lovelysoulThe letter she received seems somewhat watered down compared to the one you received.
That's because she apparently didn't e-mail the woman back for a stitch of further information. Lazy.
Amy Alkon at July 9, 2010 8:28 AM
"My favorite from your piece was this: "Well, for starters, a person who is willing to entertain suggestions from her readers is probably a little wiser than someone who puts her down for doing that.""
I'm 62, which might be twice as old as you, judging from your picture. One of the many things I've learned through just living this long is that you can learn by being willing to listen. It's not PC, it's experience garnered from over 30 years of managing widely disparate groups of people. Always listen. Always ask for other ideas. No matter what your intelligence, experience, education or background, there's a lot you don't know. More is gained through dialogue than monologue.
Lovelysoul seems to me to have a good handle on the matter.
(Sorry about the two posting identities. It was accidental. This is the real me. The other guy is loudmouth mode.)
Harmon at July 9, 2010 4:58 PM
Yea Amy D is a big snoozefest. I read it in the paper sometimes because it's right next to my daily horoscope and you know, I think the horoscope sticks in my mind a bit longer than her advice. Her advice reinforces Amy's point in regard to evolution and the female tendancy to nurture. I mean, she was actually encouraging this woman to treat this grown ass man like a little boy... "take his keys"... okay mom...the bit about bringing him a cup o' joe blew my mind away! Laughable! But seriously women do need to protect themselves by channeling that beautiful peacemaking energy back to themselves and to more deserving folk than gropey the dwarf. My suggestions: volunteer in a special needs class, or perhaps help out at the NICU by reading to premmies. Let gropey drive himself to the dunkin' donuts, alone, with his slimy keys in his slimy hands where they belong. Revenge is a dish best served cold, but my coffee is is most palatable fresh and hot when I'm sharing it with someone who respects my boundaries.
Gspotted at July 9, 2010 8:17 PM
Leave a comment