I met a guy online, and after two four-hour phone conversations, he declared he felt a "deep connection." We had a romantic date, during which he made repeated declarations of his feelings. The next morning, he sent a somewhat angry text, observing that I'd logged in again on the dating site, and while I didn't owe him anything, he found it odd. This led me to (stupidly and prematurely) proclaim him "the total package" for me and say I wouldn't see anyone else. He stopped responding several days later. Weeks later, I got a strange phone call, and thought it was him. It wasn't, but he asked me out. Our date was great, but he kept taking a half day to return texts. He claimed he'd just been busy at work, but I don't think expecting a response before six hours pass is being overly needy. I heard nothing from him until two weeks later, when I mass e-mailed my new cell number. We had another date, and he asked for exclusivity, and even said he wouldn't mind if I got pregnant. The next day, we sent friendly texts, but he again stopped responding. Now, I'm ending it for sure, but I'm reticent to date anyone else for fear this will happen again.

When you and the man in your life are talking about having a child, there are certain basic questions you need to ask yourselves, and they should be things like "Can we afford this?" and "Who will stay home with the kid?" not "Have we had a third date?"

I see so many red flags here, it's hard to tell whether I'm being asked to give advice or send birthday greetings to Chairman Mao. There are two kinds of people who have four-hour phone conversations with near strangers, and they are airplane passengers who forgot to charge their iPad and people who are not merely looking for love but desperate to find it. The latter waste no time in proclaiming their "deep connection." Emotionally healthy adults might get caught up in a moment (or hours of them), but they're generally mindful that you find out who people are by observing them -- in person, over time -- and see whether what they say matches what they do. (Text this guy if you're pregnant. He may or may not get back to you.)

Your problem isn't who you date but who you are: a girl who needs love way too much to be in a position to land any. You can really, really want love, and be really, really sick of putting a bowtie on your cat and pretending you're on a date. If you aren't driven by neediness, you understand that an appropriate post-first-date text is "Hope to see you again soon!" -- not "I've been monitoring your Internet activity and I couldn't help but notice that you aren't acting in a manner befitting a loving and faithful wife." Only when you work on yourself to the point where you're okay being alone are you ready to look for somebody else. Go looking prematurely, and there surely will be another guy like this one -- one who right away says stuff like "I can't bear to have you away from my side," and before you know it, is showing you that he's a man of his word by chaining you to his water pipe.

A friend basically called dibs on a guy we were talking with at a bar, whispering to me right away that she found him really cute. I was bummed, but backed off. We all exchanged e-mails, and vowed to hang out when he's back in town. He e-mailed me, and we've been writing a lot, and have lots in common. I confessed this to my friend, and she seemed surprised and jealous. Now, he's coming back -- just to see me. Did I overstep friendship boundaries? Should I cancel?

The first one to remark on how glorious the sunset is doesn't get to take it home. The same goes for some cute guy at a bar. You've got to appreciate the male way of doing things. They'll get into a fistfight over a woman and then buy each other a beer; women get into a whispering game about a guy and then won't speak to each other for 20 years. When your friend remarked on this guy's looks, that was your cue to say, "Omigod! I'm into him, too!" Canceling now isn't the answer. It'll only make you resent your friend. If she truly is a friend, she'll want you to be happy. She did try to pull a sneaky on you, but she ultimately knows that admiration isn't the fast track to possession -- assuming her typical reply to "Cute dress!" isn't "Unzip me, and it's yours."

My wife and I have been married four months after dating a year. She's 40; I'm 34. Before we married, we agreed (because of our values) that the man pays the daily living expenses (rent/mortgage, bills, taxes, groceries). She said I should never rely on her for money, but said she'd help me if I needed it. I'm buying us a home, and I'm overwhelmed by bills. She wants a $3,000 mattress and a high-end bedroom set, and I asked her to help pay for them. She said she would, but I'd have to pay her back. What? Aren't a husband and wife supposed to support each other? She works full time as a manager and banks her earnings or spends money on herself. Before we married, we could compromise. Now she cuts me down and wants everything her way. And she could ask me how my day was once in a while. When I mentioned that, she said I was acting like a girl. She's very beautiful -- a former model -- but I've always told her I love her for who she is, not her beauty. I still love her and don't want to end our marriage.

Here's a woman who always has your best interest at heart. In fact, she's willing to offer you several percentage points less than you'd get at Payday Loans.

Four months into wedded bills, uh, bliss, you're walking around muttering, "Aren't a husband and wife supposed to support each other?" Well, yes, unless they start their marriage by making other arrangements. Absurdly, you agreed to the family values financial plan -- the husband takes care of all the expenses. Typically, the husband does this because the wife is taking care of their home, their dogs, their ferrets, and their three overscheduled children. But, hey, at least your wife's got your back. Your back pocket, that is -- the one where you keep your wallet.

What spouses put into a marriage doesn't always work out to 50/50, but there should at least be the spirit of 50/50. If you saw that in any way from your wife, you might have hope for a loving marriage. What you have instead seems like a marriage made in pragmatism. Chances are, she saw age 40 on final approach and figured she'd better lock in a funding source (you were conveniently located). Chances are, you realized she was out of your league, but figured you could bribe her into marrying you. You perhaps assumed that marriage would inspire her to act wifelike; as in, like a partner not a prostitute with a decorating budget.

You claim you don't want to end your marriage. You're probably making a common error in rationality -- deciding to continue investing based on how much you've already invested instead of on what the future payoffs will be (or, in your case, payouts). You also claim to love your wife -- not for her stunning exterior, but for who she is on the inside (um, greedy, selfish, narcissistic, and snippy?). Come on. Surely what you love is preserving your ego -- telling yourself whatever it takes to avoid admitting, "Gee, was I ever gullible." Hey, whatever makes you happy, but it won't change who you're with -- a woman who sees you as her $chmoopie, her moneybunny, her blank checkiepoo. That aside, you can't help but admire the lady for being a go-getter (why wait for the divorce to take a guy for all he's worth?).

I've been with my boyfriend five months, and want to make him a romantic dinner. What should I serve? What should I wear? What would make it romantic, fun and special for him? How can I surprise, excite and charm him?

I find that nothing says "I love you" like a case of anaphylactic shock -- when the dinner meant to take a guy's breath away becomes the dinner that causes him to stop breathing. A severe allergic reaction is the sort of thing that can happen when you ask a total stranger what your boyfriend of five months would find tasty, romantic and sexy. (Don't bother making dessert. The hospital will give him a fruit cup after he's deintubated.)

What's actually romantic and special is getting the sense that the person you're dating gets you -- that they've been paying attention to what you're into and even remarks you've made in passing. This evening should reflect that, and you should have fun figuring out what, exactly, would surprise, excite and charm the guy. If you're totally at a loss, pay attention to what he says and does in the future, and for now, do as I do: Come to the door naked with a chicken on a spear. (My UPS man really seems to like that.)

When you gave advice to the woman complaining about her husband surfing the Internet for porn and swimsuit photos of Serena Williams, you seemed to have missed a word in her question. That word is "husband." I doubt people get married with it being okay for another man or woman to be involved in their marriage. Pornography causes great harm to marriages. It's not okay. It's not normal. It's a selfish and destructive choice.

It's hard to have a rational conversation about porn because people's first reaction is so often knee-jerk hysteria. I got a lot of that in response to this particular column; for example, as one guy wrote, "Porn focuses on body parts, not on sex. This is how bestiality develops." Yes, we see that all the time: One week, a guy's surfing the net for busty blondes; the next, he's got the hots for the neighbor's Labradoodle.

While you seem to be under the mistaken impression that I missed the word "husband" in the woman's question, you seem to have missed most of the words in my answer. Serena Williams isn't "involved" in this couple's marriage; the guy was just using pictures of her to ring some doorbell in his brain. As I explained in that column, "Seeing pictures of hot women activates the 'reward centers' in men's brains -- the parts that go 'Yeah, baby!' to stuff like drugs, beer, and money." Just as the guy isn't connecting emotionally with a can of Bud, he isn't emotionally involved with Serena, who "might as well be a big, tennis-playing ham sandwich."

Not only is it "normal" for men to look at porn, so many men look at it that what would qualify as deviant behavior would be not looking at it. Men also ogle hot women on the street and everywhere they go, but a man's forehead doesn't come with a browser history. If it did, it would likely reflect what one female reader wrote: "My husband once told me that he thinks about having sex with every woman he sees. That's Every. Single. One." She keeps this in perspective: "I have absolutely no doubt that he has been completely faithful to me. None. I don't care (about these thoughts), just like I don't care that he watches porn on the Internet. My only request is that he keep his anti-virus software up to date."

Sure, porn can pose problems in a marriage or relationship -- when used to excess. The same goes for golf clubs, credit cards, and Hostess Ding Dongs. Of course, when there are problems, people love to blame the thing being used instead of the person doing the using. This thinking is fed by the damaging contention that addiction is "a disease." Multiple sclerosis is a disease. You can't decide to not have multiple sclerosis. You can decide to stop engaging in some behavior. You might not want to stop, it might be terribly hard to stop, but if the stakes are high enough, you will. Just ask some guy who tells you he can't stop looking at porn. Sorry, but if his house catches fire, he's not going to sit there at the computer simultaneously getting off and getting crispy.

The hysteria about porn is reminiscent of the hysteria surrounding pot from early on, ever since the propaganda classic "Reefer Madness" depicted it as a demon weed that causes rape, murder, suicide, crazed piano playing, and hit-and-run driving. Of course, if you know any potheads, you know the stuff is far more likely to cause them to lie on a beanbag chair polishing off the collected works of Sara Lee. Similarly, shrill ravings about porn keep the facts about it from being heard, keeping people from being able to differentiate between porn as a problem and porn as a pastime.

This woman's husband hadn't stopped showering, going to work, or having sex with her to lock himself in a room with the naked sex workers of the World Wide Web. In fact, she described him as a sweet, loving, "deeply caring" man who only watches porn when she's out and he's bored. The actual problem in her marriage was her unfounded fears about his porn consumption -- which led to her feeling resentful and shutting down between the sheets. This sort of sex and affection strike can compel even a man who wants to be faithful to expand his horizons from sightseeing in the virtual world to getting naked with co-workers and rent-a-booty in the real one. So, as I advised this woman, no man "only has eyes for you," but if you'd like keep the rest of your husband's body parts from wandering, you should see to it that your bedroom isn't the one place in the world that he can't get sex.

I'm a 40-something married woman with an unwanted admirer. Last year, an 80ish married man, a member of my literary club, called me, confessed his passion for me, and begged me to have a romantic dinner with him. I reluctantly made plans to meet "Romeold" for coffee, intending to let him down gently. He took this "date" as a green light to e-mail me a lurid "fictional" story -- a detailed blueprint for the affair he wanted us to have. Horrified, I canceled, apologized for any confusion, and made it clear that no affair was going to happen. He replied with a terse "So be it!" I avoided him all year, missing many club meetings. Last month, I ran into him at one. I was civil, but left him to chat with others. Afterward, he e-mailed a "special invite" to a critique group he's started at his house. When I didn't reply, he sent another invite with a bizarre faux-pology. I haven't replied, and feel I can no longer attend the meetings due to his fixation on me. How can I get it through Romeold's thick, balding skull that I'm totally uninterested and to please leave me alone?

The elderly horndog can be kind of cute -- when he's working the senior moment angle and asking all the girls in the bar, "Say, do I come here often?"

It's a whole lot less cute when the horndog isn't some random old man but somebody you know socially; somebody who sent you "a detailed blueprint" of exactly what he'd like to do to you with his veiny, wandering hands. Never mind that this attention was utterly unprompted by you, that you're both married, and that he's twice your age, meaning that the movie stud he most closely resembles is Yoda.

Where you went wrong is in not shutting the guy down right away. You don't make a date with a guy to tell him you don't want to date him. You especially don't when the guy starts hitting on you at defcon "Let's play Doctor Zhivago!" Chances are, you didn't respond as you did because you're some naive bunny, but because you're a woman. Women evolved to be the nurturers and peacemakers of the species, making them prone to shove aside their best interest in favor of preserving people's feelings. True to form -- as a woman -- you even apologized for causing "any confusion." By doing what, existing in his eyeline? It's not like you plopped into his lap in an I Heart Grandpa t-shirt and asked for an, um, oral history (starting in his boyhood years, back when families subscribed to the Dead Sea Scrolls instead of the newspaper).

Don't be "civil" to this creepus. Don't be anything to him -- unless he persists in approaching you or contacting you, in which case, you should be the person who says "Don't contact me, don't speak to me, don't come anywhere near me." In the future, resolve that your safety and comfort level will take precedence over not wanting to hurt or disappoint people or seem rude or unsympathetic. There's a time to respect your elders and a time to recognize one of them for the dirty old masher he is. Yeah, sure, there's all the "Do not go gentle into that good night" stuff he's been reading, but I'm pretty sure the rest of that isn't "Get her alone after lit crit group and blurt out, 'Say, young lady, wanna see if I'm wrinkled all over?'"

A woman I met somewhat recently admitted she was "head over heels" for me. Because I like to get to know a person before contemplating anything romantic, I said we should be friends first, take it slow, and see where it goes. She agreed, but ends conversations by calling me "sweet pea" or "sweetheart," making me suspect she isn't okay with taking it slow.

It's sometimes what people don't include in their requests for advice that's the essential detail. It took me three e-mails to pull it out of you -- the answer to my question, "Are you attracted to her?" Your reply: "I like her as a person but nothing more." Well, she's a girl, not an acorn you store up in case it's a long winter. If you aren't into somebody who's into you, that's what she needs to know -- not that you want to "take it slow" (because with a little time, she could grow a new head and body and become exactly your type?). As for how this woman ends conversations, you won't have to fret about what "sweetpea" really means once you help her get a sense of what you really meant by "taking it slow": True love waits. But nowhere near as long as "couldn't be less attracted to you."