I'm a 41-year-old married lesbian. My wife and I used to work from home together. She recently got an important job, and she's now gone all day, five days a week. I'm happy for her, and this is good for us in the long run, but I'm really sad and lonely.

--Isolated

Avoid any temptation to kidnap strangers lingering in your building's lobby. "Are you going to cut me up and put me in your freezer?" the terrified UPS man will ask. You: "Uh, I thought we'd just hang out and have coffee, but whatever works for you."

Healthier (and less felonious) forms of coping start with unpacking what loneliness is. The late neuroscientist John Cacioppo explained loneliness as a painful feeling of "disconnection" from others. He differentiated loneliness -- the aching longing for human connection -- from a desire for solitude, "the pleasures of sometimes being by yourself." And he and his wife and research partner, psychologist Stephanie Cacioppo, noted that loneliness has been associated with serious negative effects on not just emotional well-being but also physical health -- including an increased risk of heart attacks. (It seems heartbreak isn't just a metaphor.)

However, as you're staring gloomily into the void (the indentation in the couch where your wife used to sit during the day), it might help to understand that our emotions are actually our watchdogs. They rise up in us to motivate us to engage in the sort of behaviors -- like connecting with other people -- that would help us survive and pass on our genes.

For example, we humans evolved to be cooperators -- interdependent -- which is to say we're "people who need people." Take author Henry David Thoreau, an icon for hermitude and self-sufficiency who put in big chunks of alone time out by Walden Pond. What few people realize, notes Thoreau expert Elizabeth Witherell, is that he was also a huge people person. In fact, Thoreau wrote in "Walden," "I think that I love society as much as most, and am ready enough to fasten myself like a bloodsucker for the time to any full-blooded man that comes in my way."

As for you, it's possible that some of the feelbad you're experiencing is the discomfort we often feel about change. But chances are, you'd feel a good bit better if you could replace at least some of the level of daily human engagement you're used to. You could, for example, go out to a coffee shop for part of your workday -- the same coffee shop every day so you can connect with other regulars there. You could also invite work-at-home friends over to your place to be coworkers. Volunteer work could be helpful, too.

No, it isn't the same as having your wife there with you all day. But it should dial down your separation distress -- perhaps even substantially. This should allow you to let your wife know you really missed her -- but maybe just with a sexy kiss at the door. No guilt tripping, sadwifeface, or going man's best friend-style -- spending your day shredding all the paper products in the house with your teeth and then moving on to the drywall.

How do you know when a man's "I love you" is for real? I've had men express their love to me with great sincerity, only to vanish not long afterward. Are all men this fickle? Manipulative?

--Upset

Why does a man say "I love you"? Sometimes because "Look, a ferret in a top hat!" doesn't do much to get a woman into bed.

To parse whether a man's "I love you" is just the later-in-the-relationship version of "You related to Yoda? Because yodalicious," you need to consider context. The exact same statement can have different meanings depending on the context -- the situation, the circumstances in which it's made.

Not surprisingly, research by evolutionary social psychologist Joshua Ackerman and his colleagues suggests that men's I-love-yous "are likely to be more sincere (i.e., less colored by the goal of attaining initial sexual access) after sex has occurred." They also find that men, on average, start thinking about "confessing love" 97 days into a relationship -- so just over three months. Of course, an individual man may know sooner or take longer.

All in all, the best lie detector you probably have is context -- racking up a good bit of time and experiences with a man and seeing how well the walk matches the talk. You might even wait till the three-month benchmark before concluding that the I-love-yous are likely to be for real -- and aren't, say, the best possible air bag for what might come shortly afterward: "I got you a little something on my work trip. It requires a short course of antibiotics."

Why are there lots of bridal magazines but no magazines for grooms? What does that imply?

--A Male

Consider men's general lack of interest in wedding planning. Of course, if men did the organizing, there'd probably be a paintball duel to the altar, strippers serving nachos, and a minister who ends the ceremony with: "You may now have a threesome with the bride and her sister."

However, what we could call the "wedding-industrial complex" -- with $56 billion in sales in the U.S. in 2017 (per The Wedding Report) -- is driven mainly by women (and, more recently -- and to a lesser extent -- very stylish gay men). So we often hear about "bridezillas" -- human nightmares losing it over picky-wicky wedding details -- but it's the rare man who even comes close to caring enough to be called a "groomzilla."

In fact, though many women start planning their weddings years before meeting a potential groom, there probably isn't a guy out there who gave thought to, say, what the centerpieces would be until he absolutely had to: "Um...honey, am I crazy, or is that an electric cattle prod you're holding?"

And frankly, for the average guy getting married, the ideal situation would be to propose, get clocked with a bowling trophy, and wake up 10 months later to one of his bros shaking a tux in his face and saying, "Hose off and get dressed, man. You gotta be at the chapel in an hour!"

These sex differences in wedding micromanagement reflect evolved sex differences in what evolutionary psychologists David Buss and David Schmitt call "sexual strategies." These refer to long-term versus short-term orientation in mating -- committed sex versus casual sex.

Though there are times when casual sex is the optimal choice for a woman, in general, women tend to benefit more from a "long-term mating strategy" -- holding out for men who are willing and able to stick around to protect and provide for their children. (Think handsome prince -- and all that "happily ever after" stuff -- versus handsome hookup.)

Men will suck it up and opt for a long-term relationship for a number of reasons, Buss and Schmitt explain: because being on the hunt is time-, energy-, and resource-sucking and because "highly desirable" women can hold out for commitment. But because a man can, let's just say, sheet 'em and street 'em and still have a pretty good chance of passing on his genes, men often benefit more from a "short-term sexual strategy" -- quantity over quality, or what I call the "I love a parade!" model.

Still, this isn't all that's driving the average man's lack of interest in the color of the posies on the dessert table. There's also the evolved sex difference in status competition -- the differing ways men and women compete for status intrasexually (with others of their sex).

As I explained recently, a major way men compete for status with other men is by being accompanied by smoking-hot women. (Welcome to the Armcandylympics!) These hotties don't have to be wives or girlfriends; they just shouldn't look like they're with a guy simply because his credit card cleared at the rent-a-"model" website.

Women, on the other hand, evolved to compete for status with other women by pairing up with the most high-status man they can get. Though we're living in modern times, we're still driven by Stone Age psychology. In ancestral times, a woman's partner's status would have been a life-or-death issue -- affecting the level of "provisioning" (eats, housing) and protection she had for herself and her children.

In other words, so-called "princess culture" was created by evolution, not Disney. So little girls, to the great dismay of their progressive parents, are drawn to those stories of the scullery maid who ends up marrying the prince -- the rich, high-status, hunky dude (good genes!) who could have any woman but finds our girl uniquely bewitching.

A man bewitched is a man less likely to stray -- so the fairy tale is actually a commitment fantasy. The "fairy tale wedding" is a celebration of that -- the successful completion of an evolutionary imperative, or, as the bride might put it: "Nyah-nyah-nyah-nyah-nyah-nyah! You girls fight amongst yourselves for the toothless peasants!"

Getting back to the male point of view, a guy gets married because he has become "bewitched" ("fallen in love," in contemporary terms) and wants a life partner and/or a family and realizes that sex with a string of strippers is not the path to suburban dad-hood. However, even when a man decides to commit to one particular woman, his evolved drive for sexual variety remains. So...to finally answer your question: No man wants to buy "Grooms!" magazine -- because a wedding is, in a sense, a giant frothy funeral for his sex life.

I'm a 31-year-old guy who got really hurt after a relationship ended a few years back. Now I just don't date women whom I'll ever really care about because I don't ever want to feel how I felt when my previous relationship ended. My friends say I'm being a coward and missing out, but, hey, I'm not depressed over any chicks. I think I'm being smart in protecting myself. Maybe more people should take this approach.

--Comfortably Numb

These days, your relationships probably start when you eyeball a woman on the street: "Whoa! I bet she'd be seriously mediocre in bed!"

Next, you discover that she's a real yawn out of the sack, too -- and you're in!

Now, it's possible that you're way more emotionally sensitive than most people, to the point where a loss that others would eventually recover from hits you like a never-ending colonoscopy (with, um, artisanal anesthesia: "If you'll just bite this stick...").

Even if you are super sensitive, avoiding the pain comes at a substantial price: living a gray goulash of a life, spending every day with some uninspiring somebody you don't really care about. But consider that we evolved to be resilient -- to heal from emotional injuries as we do physical ones. However, in order for you to do this -- and to see that you might actually be able to stand the pain of loss -- you need to view resilience not as some mysterious emotional gift but as a practice.

Resilience comes out of what clinical psychologist Salvatore Maddi calls "hardiness." He writes that "hardiness ... provides the courage and motivation to do the hard, strategic work of turning stressful circumstances from potential disasters into growth opportunities." His research finds that hardiness is made up of three "interrelated attitudes," which he calls the three Cs: Commitment, Control, and Challenge.

Commitment is the desire to engage with people and life instead of pulling away and isolating yourself. Control is the motivation to take action to improve your life "rather than sinking into passivity and powerlessness." Challenge is the willingness to face the stress life throws at you and use it as a learning experience "rather than playing it safe by avoiding uncertainties and potential threats."

These attitudes might not come naturally to you. But you can choose to take them up, same as you might other "unnatural practices," like monogamy and wearing deodorant. Understanding that there are steps you can take to recover from heartbreak might give you the courage to go for a woman you really love.

Sure, that woman might leave you -- causing you big-time pain. But consider that risk avoidance -- like by being with a woman you don't really care about -- isn't pain avoidance. The pain is just different. It's low-dose extended-release -- like frequently experiencing the post-sex horror that leads you to want to grab your clothes and make a run for it before the woman next to you wakes up. And then you remember a couple of essential points: She's your wife, not some Tinder rando, and it's your apartment.

I'm a straight 36-year-old woman, and I recently lost a lot of weight. My doctor's happy. My girlfriends think I look great. They're all "How'd you do it?" "You look like a model!" However, my male friends think I'm too skinny now. Is there a big difference in what the sexes consider a good body?

--Slim

Though women assume that men think the ideal female body shape is modeliciously skinny, consider that construction workers rarely yell out, "Hey, Hotstuff! Great set of ribs!"

In studies exploring men's and women's ideas of the ideal female body weight, women consistently "perceive men as being attracted to thinner female figures than is true in reality," writes social psychologist Viren Swami. And it isn't just North American men who like fleshier women. Swami ran a massive survey -- of 7,434 men and women in 26 countries, across 10 world regions -- and "men across all world regions except East Asia selected a significantly heavier figure as being most physically attractive compared to what women believed was most attractive to men."

Swami and his colleagues speculate that "women exposed to magazines marketed to women may form skewed perceptions of what body types are most appealing to men." But don't despair. Swami's study and others measure the preferences of the "average" man. There is no such person. Or, as an epidemiologist friend of mine often reminds me, there are "individual differences" -- meaning individuals' preferences vary. In other words, there are men out there who will be seriously into a woman like you -- a woman who can do amazing feats in the bedroom, like removing a pair of skinny jeans without calling 911 and asking for firemen to come over with the Jaws of Life.

My husband and I are lucky -- like that couple in their 70s you wrote about -- to have a satisfying sex life after 23 years together. Still, to be honest, there are times when we're just going through the motions. I guess it's natural that it isn't as exciting as it was that first year or so. Maybe we just have to accept it. Or...is there anything we can do? (We do have date nights and try to experiment with new things.)

--Ho-Humming Somewhat

It's like buying your dream house -- and then living in it for 12 years. You still love it -- but you don't jump up and down and yell "Woo-hoo! We live here!" the 10,044th time you walk through your door.

The good news is, there's a way to perk up the sexual excitement level in a long-term relationship, and it doesn't involve attending parties where they have a bowl of keys at the door. You just need to get back to really being there while you're having sex. This means truly feeling -- that is, really being present for -- the moment-by-moment sensations, like you did the very first time you got together. You know...back before you started (let's be honest) sexual multitasking -- running through your to-do list while getting it on -- and your sex face started to become a yawn. Your husband looks up from, um, down there: "Oh, sorry -- was I boring you?"

Clinical psychologist Lori Brotto, who researches female sexual desire and arousal issues, finds that a practice called "mindfulness" -- with Eastern spiritual origins -- seems to be "an effective way of re-routing one's focus ... onto the sensations that are unfolding in the moment." Mindfulness, which is also a form of meditation, involves bringing your attention to the immediate moment. This isn't to say you have to meditate to have better sex. However, one of the mindfulness meditation techniques involves scanning your body with your mind, focusing your attention on individual parts, and observing the sensations in them in that moment. That's key.

So, for example, point your attention at your breathing, at the points of skin-to-skin contact between you and your husband. Notice the temperature of your skin. Hot? Cool? Do you feel tiny beads of sweat?

Brotto writes in "Better Sex Through Mindfulness" that in her research, "when the women learn to be right where they are when with a partner, rather than in the myriad other places that their mind escapes to during sex, they start to experience sexual contact with their partner in a way that perhaps they had not experienced for months, years, or decades." In other words, yes, there's still hope to hear animalistic screaming in your bedroom again -- and not just when your husband pulls on the oven mitts and holds the cat down so you can clip her toenails without losing an eye.

I'm a 35-year-old guy. My fiancee broke up with me a year ago. I was devastated. We don't have any contact now, but I still love her. I haven't been on one date since our breakup, and I reminisce about her constantly. My guy friends are like, "Move on, dude. Get a life!" But honestly, that's not that helpful. What is the best way to get over an ex besides time?

--Stuck

That which does not kill you makes you crap company on poker night. "Jeez, man, quit crying on the cards!"

Your buddies surely mean well in taking the "just say the magic words!" approach -- "Get over it! Lotta fish in the sea, man!" -- but you're trying to recover from a breakup, not summon a genie. Lingering feelings of love for your fiancee are the problem. As for a solution, research by cognitive psychologist Sandra J.E. Langeslag suggests you can decrease those feelings through "negative reappraisal" of your ex-partner -- basically looking back and trying to see all the "bad" in her. For example, focus on her annoying habits and rude and stupid things she said and did.

When Langeslag's research participants mentally trashed their ex-partner, it did diminish the love they felt for their ex...yay! However, there was a side effect: All of this negative thinking -- not surprisingly -- made participants feel pretty bummed out. But helpfully, Langeslag came around with a second strategy that helped them block out the feelbad: distraction -- answering questions "about positive things unrelated to the breakup or the partner (e.g., What is your favorite food? Why?)."

Probably an even better source of distraction is turning to what Langeslag calls a "secondary task" (like playing a video game). Keep up the negativity and the distracting secondary tasks and before long, you should find yourself ready for a level-three distraction: losing yourself in a forest of Tinder hussies.