He's hoping it will roll over a la Pretty Woman. He's watched too many romantic comedies.

This could be a script for the 2012 Katherine Heigl movie where she has to chose between a nice dependable man and a rebel, and chooses the rebel.

Not to be confused with the 2011 Katherine Heigl movie where she had to chose between a nice dependable man and a rebel, and chose the rebel.

Or confused with the 2010.... well, you know, Katherine Heigl movie where she....

Happy Thanksgiving. :)

"Heavy drug use, laziness, prudishness, still in love with old boy..." So he wants a light drug using, moderately slutty chick with proven inability to form normal emotional connections. That is, a secondary character from a light romantic comedy movie.

At least he's honest and pleasant about it.

I totally get where he's coming from. My typical work week is 50+ hours. Trying to maintain a romantic relationship on top that is a lot of work.

He's looking for a friendly person to share the holidays with no true strings attached.

I'm totally stealing this. THIS is what I want. An un-relationship.

"So he wants a light drug using, moderately slutty chick with proven inability to form normal emotional connections."

Well . . . yeah. The problem?

More slutty would be good.

Sheesh.

What Nic said. Boys,

Lay a whisper

on my pillow...

It's honest, cute and funny! Did I mention honest?

Would totally go for it if I weren't married.....

Creative and funny, and I'm sure he'll get a few takers. (A woman posting an ad like this for a holiday boyfriend would, of course, be swamped with replies from men.)

What I don't get is why a woman still being in love with someone from years past is a dealbreaker for him if he's just looking for a temporary arrangement.

@Jim - he doesn't wanna be used as her cry towel for getting over old relationships.

I hope, for his sake, he's really got a good eye for what temporary would be. I perused Craigslist for the same, replied to an ad for the same, and ended up with the love of my life. True story. Things happen when you least expect them.

If it works, sounds like a great idea.

I think it highlights what I have found any place where I have spent much time...everything is geared towards couples & families. Especially during the holiday season.

I mean like a got ad for a NYE party. $75/person or $80 per couple when purchased together ($5 discount for couples purchasing tickets before Dec. 24).

> he doesn't wanna be used as her cry towel

It's so annoying nowadays to have to be concerned with other people's emotions, especially when you're just trying to be intimate with them!

Especially women!... They don't understand the concept of boundaries!

Example!—

> Would totally go for it if I weren't
> married.....

EYE-ronic, amirite?

> everything is geared towards couples & families.

I don't know what this means. I've been single for a long time, dating when I want to, and have been welcomed by the world with as much warmth and courtesy as a human heart can handle.

Thanks Brian. I understand that but I still don't see why that would be a deal-breaker for him. I'm going on the assumption that he's mainly interested in meeting a woman for cuddling (or as we men call it, sex.) If I wanted to have a temporary arrangement with a woman for that, she could cry as much as she wanted to about all of her old boyfriends as long as she was hot in bed.

I understand you can rent temporary relationships. Oh, wait. He just wants the illusion this isn't what he's doing.

he doesn't wanna be used as her cry towel

And just what the hell is wrong with that? I *like* emotionally damaged women. In fact, I think I require it. Gives you something to talk about while you're cuddling.

Crid - yes. Be confident about yourself and don't make apologies for being single, and it ain't such a big deal.

(or as we men call it, sex.)

You should work for the NSA with that sort of code-breaking skill Jim :)

Oh, wait. He just wants the illusion this isn't what he's doing

No, Walt. He just doesn't want to pay $5k/day for it. The deal is, I'll pay in romantic, gooey gestures rather than cash. Someone will probably go for it, but I doubt it will be what he's hoping for.

> He just wants the illusion

Seriously not comprehending this.

Yes, there are a few settings where people prefer to welcome couples. When I'm single, being excluded from those events –where such considerations mean more to the host than do my feelings or my company– has never been a burden. I don't mean that cynically, or in a sour-grapesy way: In any community, there are tables to which we'll not be invited, including a few at which we might have enjoyed a seat. But life has disappointments, and I'm cool with this one.

However— In any setting of the most moderate intimacy under which holiday feelings could truly glow, the people who welcome you are are going to be interested your date in a personal way. If you say "Found 'er on Craigslist, sensibly detached, but we're good through January 3rd", they're probably not going to feel the spirit.

Something ain't adding up with this guy.

Jim... that's totally what he's hoping.

I thought men always tried to get rid of girlfriends for the holidays so they didn't have to buy them presents? Kidding of course, I haven't dated anyone like that since high school. But I am curious how he plans on handling that, will he take her to his parents for Christmas dinner, the company Christmas party, or what about New Year's Eve? Maybe I should email and ask him about those things...

Mmm, spending the holidays with an acquaintance you're planning to dump. Or does the guy want to glom onto a woman who has a life and won't demand much of him?

Thanks Ltw & Nicole. I got a kick out of how he used "cute snuggly things" and "excellent cuddler" with no mention of sex. Okay, he did say "fucking" but it was with "cold."

The more I think about it, the more I think what he might be trying for here is a trial run. I think he's actually interested in something more than temporary (note "After that we can still be friends") but is putting a pull date on the arrangement upfront as a way to, in his mind, avoid hurting the woman's feelings in case he's not into her after the trial run ("I think you're a great person but I told you this was just going to be temporary.") This, to me, helps explain the most puzzling aspect: why he doesn't want a woman who's still in love with someone else. He wants to know that she's emotionally available just in case he ends up really liking her. I could be wrong but that's my theory.

I think you're onto something there Jim. I was puzzled by the insistence that she not be hung up on someone else too. If I were looking for a temporary/casual thing like this (which I'm really not, I get attached way too easily - but then I suck at long term relationships. Not sure where that leaves me) that would be the least of my worries. Or even a plus. Under certain circumstances I might even agree to taking photos to send to the unrequited love interest. No, probably not.

I predict he'll be the one to not want to end it, but he'll want to continue on much the same arrangement. Free, no strings attached nookie can be pretty addictive! And if he really is the snuggly, cuddly type he claims, I would be very wary if I was a woman - he's probably a lot clingier than he thinks. Casual fling now, stalker tomorrow.

Apologies to NicoleK who said exactly the same thing right at the top of the thread in just two pithy sentences. That logical reasoning thing just took a while to catch up to your instant intuition :)

Here's to him finding the love of his life!!!

> NicoleK who said exactly the same thing right
> at the top

She does that a lot.

> Here's to him finding the love of his life!!!

Here's to him starting to look for her, which it doesn't sound like he's done yet.

(Not that it matters— love has a secret wristwatch.)

(Boo!)

I understand you can rent temporary relationships. Oh, wait. He just wants the illusion this isn't what he's doing.

Posted by: walt

The illusion? Or the legal shield to prevent him from being charged with federal crimes of human trafficking?

Seriously what is the problem with prostitution people? Everybody does it, every single day.

Nikah Mut'ah. The temporary marriage (pre-Islamic yet still embraced) of Islam. About time Christians got to this, honey at home, honey away. Meets that nasty male sex drive (which one-half of the population suffers from because it is wrong, only estrogen rules).

Lujip,

I sense you use prostitution in a deeper way than us on the lip. Never have visited a sex-worker, not once. However, reading Maggie McNeill's blog has changed my views, wish I'd "met" her when I was younger. So many opportunities, so little time, so little time left.

I'd add to my comment at 8:26 PM that only Christianity went buggers on male sexuality. Islam recognizes it in marriage as do Jews in marriage (in neither is the wife allowed to deny it to the husband, within reason, you know, tit for tat). Only with Paul is the male drive denied. So he couldn't have been gay, just in case some of you think that.

Oh, wait...

Ariel going on about:

Jews in marriage (in neither is the wife allowed to deny it to the husband, within reason, you know, tit for tat)

Well, no.
No such thing in Judaism as being able to force my wife to do anything. And I'm the resident Orthodox Jew here, so please don't bother bluffing on this.

Protracted denial of intimacy could be grounds for divorce - but that's a major step not treated as lightly as it is in the secular world.

Ben David,

I pulled that from the writings of a another Jew, so no bluffing. It had nothing to do with force, and I do realize the force issue in Islam so the juxtaposition of the two would lead to your conclusion.

So there is nothing in Judaism on the marraige contract regarding wife to husband and sex? So where the grounds for divorce by protracted denial?

Funny how your mind went from needless denials of sex by women immediatly to rape of women

lujip,

If you meant me, huh?

If you meant Ben David, that's understandable by my juxtaposition of the two other Abrahamic religions without disclaimer. I was going more for the actual realization of the importance of sex in marriage, the friction between the two sex drives, and Paul's hang up about celibacy, even within marriage, as the highest ideal. Asceticism be damned.

Celibacy does not a good marriage make. Verstehen? (A pun on my word order, no twisted knickers please.)

No, it was at ben david - what kind of reasonable person would have assumed you were advocating rape?

lujip,

I likely hit a hot button with lumping Judaism and Islam, given that Islam allows force and Judaism doesn't. It leads to unreasonableness.

I more than suspected it was aimed at Ben David, and thank you for the affirmation. One never knows for sure how another reads what one wrote until clarified. We come from so many directions to reach this cross road.