When should you friend your date on Facebook?

When's the right time to friend your dates on Facebook? You might be surprised by the results of a new dating survey.

So, you're about to go out on a date with a new guy, and you're dying to get the details on him. You've checked his Twitter account, Googled him and even given his LinkedIn profile a once-over.

Now, the big question: Do you friend him on Facebook?

A new survey by Mashable and Survata put that question to 3,000 daters, and?— not surprisingly — most (26.9 percent) think it's better to wait until you've gone on more than a few dates.

What is surprising? Another 26.6 percent think it's OK to add the other person before a first date.

Before the first date — 26.6 percentAfter the first date — 21 percentAfter multiple dates — 26.9 percentNot until he or she friends you — 13 percentWhen you decide to be mutually exclusive — 12.5 percent

It seems a little strange to friend someone before you've even really "met" him, but it might be a wise choice since you can cancel the date — and save an excruciating couple of hours — if it turns out he's a hard-drinking slob who lives in his mom's basement.

Just a thought.

Apparently, sexting isn't as popular as Anthony Weiner makes it out to be. According to the survey, 61.5 percent of men and 70.5 percent of women claim they've never sexted.

Call us cynical, but that's a little hard to believe.

In an interesting aside, sexting is most common among unmarried people in committed relationships, 25.6 percent of whom report that they've done it. On the other hand, only 17.5 percent of singles say they have sent and received sexts, while sexting among married people drops to 9.2 percent.

Come on, married couples! It's time to bring back romance in marriage.

When do you friend your dates on Facebook? Sound off below!

Is kissing on the decline?
The secret to packing one suitcase for you and him
How to: Give the best massage he's ever had

View the original article here

How much your wedding photographer should cost

When the cake is cut and the dress has been worn, one thing remains forever after the wedding (besides love, of course): the photos.

Choosing a wedding photographer is one of the most important decisions a couple will make for their big day, but hiring an appropriately priced photographer can be confusing.

What's too high or too low? What percent of your budget should you spend? Here, professional photographers and wedding experts weigh in.

Generally speaking, you can expect to spend 10 to 15 percent of your budget on wedding photography coverage, and another 10 percent on any accessories you want to purchase, whether before or after your wedding, says Lia Moore, wedding designer and planner at Full Circle Eventi. Your package should include the digital negatives of your event, but be sure to clarify the specifics with the photographer. Many photographers will only enhance 10 to 15 photos, while the rest of the 700 images are only negatives, she warns.

"You'll hear a lot of people say 10 to 15 percent, but if photography is important to you, don't be afraid to make it a larger portion of your budget," says Christine Lee Smith, of Christine Lee Smith Photography. "Every person is different, but 10 to 15 percent is a good baseline average. Remember, in photography just like everything else, you get what you pay for."

The actual cost of the engagement and wedding photos varies greatly by city and what is included in the package, but a general estimate is $300 to $500 for engagement photo shoots, and $2,500 to $10,000 for wedding shoots, according to Steve Lesnick, photographer at Toastphoto. The bride and groom should read the contract carefully to see how many photos the price includes, whether an album is included, etc.

Experience also determines how much a photographer should cost. "A new photographer (less than two years pro) would be high-minded to charge $5,000," Smith says. "Years of experience add to the value, so make sure to look at plenty of samples. And don't be afraid to ask to see an ‘entire event,' not just the best of."

Wedding packages can be as sparse as shooting only, to as deluxe as including e-sessions and albums, she says. "In wedding photography, remember more is not always better," Smith explains. "Compare two hypothetical photographers, both charging $3,000: Photographer A is also including an e-session, eight hours on the wedding day, and an album; photographer B is only providing eight hours on the wedding day. Which is the better deal? It depends — the better question is whose photographs do you like more? It may be worth it to get less now, and have photographs that are worth saving later."

It's imperative to read the contract carefully to determine what kind of deal you're getting for your money, says Chris Mader, with Timothy Whaley & Associates Photographic Artists. "Do you have an out if you don't like the photographer?" He says. "When do you get to meet them? If it's two weeks or two months before your wedding, it won't matter if you don't like them; who on earth are you going to hire at that point?"

Lastly, Mader says be cautious of the lowest cost photographer. "Experience, professionalism, service and quality simply aren't cheap," he says.

Wedding videos are a hot trend and are often shown at the rehearsal dinner, bachelor(ette) parties or at the reception. But a professionally done video can be super costly, so rather than hiring an overpriced cameraman, try Cadaboo, a quirky video editing website that offers a team of professional animators that help to spice up your big day. Simply upload your favorite pictures and create a video that combines the personal and professional aspects you crave.

What to ask your wedding vendors
Real women dish on their biggest wedding planning oops!
Wedding photos 101

View the original article here

Dating questions answered: Should he pay on a first date?

Dating can be a minefield of questions and concerns whether you're on a first date, a third or you haven't even asked him out yet. That's why we're answering some of the most common dating questions with the help of some experts, starting with: Should he pay on a first date? Stay tuned for more questions later this month.

Paying for the date defines the date as an actual date, says April Masini, relationship expert behind the critically acclaimed Ask April advice column and author of four books on dating including Date Out of Your League. “If he pays for the first date, the date is clearly a date and it's not 'hanging out.' This is important so that you both understand that you're dating and not stepping into that swampland better known as the friend zone,” she explains. “When he pays for the date and picks you up, drops you off and does other things associated with dating and not hanging out, there is less confusion in the relationship.”

It happened to her: "I once went out with a guy a few times, to a bar for a few drinks and then to a movie and we each paid our own way. It turned out that this guy wasn't actually interested in me, at least not as more than a friend. Lesson learned. I totally take into consideration whether a guy pays to make sure he's actually into me." Tonya, San Antonia, Texas

When he pays for the first date, that gives you insight into his fiscal self, notes Masini. You get to know what he's like when it comes to spending money. “This is an important part of who he is and a great way to learn about him and to be able to decide if he's someone you want to continue dating,” she explains. “For instance, if he insists on splitting the bill, you can expect more of the same, and less generosity than you might be looking for in a relationship. Or if he's someone who's toting a Groupon and a Living Social coupon and whips them both out at happy hour where your date is virtually free, he may be someone who's always looking to cut corners.”

It happened to her: "My ex-husband was notoriously cheap. We rarely went out for dinner, vacations were unheard of unless you count his parents' condo in Florida. Looking back, he was always tight with money, even on our first few dates where he made me split the bill every time. I should have paid better attention to that fact!" Natasha, San Jose, California

Paying for the first date also shows he's invested in dating and isn't just looking for a good time (or a booty call). After all, dating is expensive. “After a guy adds up the price of dinner, the movie, the grooming expenses, the gas, the car maintenance he has to pay for to make sure he can pick you up?— it's expensive to date,” affirms Masini. “So if a guy is paying for that first date, it means he's invested in the process. He wants to spend the money because he's looking for a real relationship,” she explains. “Someone who's just looking for a good time isn't interested in investing in a first date the same way someone who springs for an impressive concert and Champagne is.”

It happened to her: "I honestly don't mind chipping in for a date. I'm not one of those women who needs car doors opened for her or flowers every other day. But it really does feel like someone cares about the outcome of a date when they pay or at least offer to pay. It's not the be all and end all, but it can speak volumes about how interested someone really is." Bethany, Newark, New Jersey

Tips for a first date that will ensure a second date
Date disaster: Mistakes you don't realize you're making
A guide to letting your guard down

View the original article here

Should I insist my partner divorces his ex-wife?

Almost two years ago (I am now 38, he is 40) I met my partner through work. Even though he was married it did not stop the attraction and we had an affair. He left his wife two months into the affair and we have been together since. The problem is his wife. She has never accepted that the marriage is over, still calls him "her love" and phones at least twice a day. My partner has not helped by not starting divorce proceedings (even though we are engaged) and talks about how guilty he feels about leaving her and his four-year-old child. I feel I should make a point and say divorce or I leave, as the situation is becoming more and more intolerable.

‧ When leaving a message on this page, please be sensitive to the fact that you are responding to a real person in the grip of a real-life dilemma, who wrote to Private Lives asking for help, and may well view your comments here. Please consider especially how your words or the tone of your message could be perceived by someone in this situation, and be aware that comments which appear to be disruptive or disrespectful to the individual concerned will be removed.

‧ If you would like fellow readers to respond to a dilemma of yours, send us an outline of the situation of about 150 words. For advice from Pamela Stephenson Connolly on sexual matters, send us a brief description of your concerns.

‧ All correspondence should reach us by Wednesday morning. Email: private.lives@guardian.co.uk (please don't send attachments).

View the original article here

Should I break up with my long-term friend?

Is it a good idea to sever ties with an old friend, or are friendships too precious to throw away? Photograph: David J. Green/Alamy

The Dilemma I don't know whether or not to "break up" with a?long-term friend. We've been friends since university and are now both in our 30s.? The friendship has had its ups and downs. In the past couple of years I have been let down, made to feel inferior, left out of social events and received fairly acidic comments. I've always shrugged these off and my friend continues to stay in touch through email.? Part of me wants to see the good in her and keep the friendship alive, but I'm also angry at being treated like a doormat. So, do I?sit down with her, tell her how I feel and find a way forward or, alternatively, do I somehow break up with her, ditch the nostalgia and stop being misty-eyed for the friendship we had in our 20s? If the latter, how does one do that without hurting someone's feelings? We live in different cities, but social media seems to magnify everyone's lives these days.

Mariella replies Break up? Isn't that a little extreme? It sounds more like a cry for attention than a reasoned response to your pal's perceived misdemeanours. True friends are as rare as honest politicians, so I'd argue that social slights and rocky patches need to be carefully weighed against the benefits, even if it is "misty-eyed" nostalgia in places.

For many, long-term friendships, rather than family ties, are the foundations for sustainable lives. Few of us haven't experienced the gravitational pull of our pals in times of trouble and been kept in orbit by their wisdom and kindness. Husbands, wives and lovers come and go, children leave home and pets die. Best friends, on the other hand, tend to display qualities bordering on the masochistic; they endure long periods of abandonment but are right by your side when trouble comes calling.

We invest less in our friendships and expect more of friends than any other relationship. We spend days working out where to book for a romantic dinner, weeks wondering how to celebrate a partner or parent's birthday and seconds forgetting a?friend's important anniversary.

Nowadays friends are seldom next door and new technology is as much of a help as a hindrance, giving us all the illusion we are communicating when all we're doing is keeping the lines open. Regular exchanges are invaluable, but certainly not the glue that binds us together. We can reach out across cities and oceans, see the faces of friends and loved ones close up courtesy of Skype, but with such convenience comes a more casual approach that's wide open to misunderstanding. Who knows what your friend is reading between your lines and vice versa?

Like cars, every relationship requires a bit of an occasional service, and fine-tuning should be compulsory. Unlike our other relationships they're based entirely on personal choice and come without expectation or rules. We do well to feed them with what they need to flourish, rather than leave them to wither while our gaze is elsewhere. Every friendship goes through ups and downs. Dysfunctional patterns set in, external situations cause internal friction, you grow apart and then bounce back together. In traumatic moments friends can get the blame when partners are at fault, in divorces and separations they negotiate minefields and when we're feeling insecure they're judged to be lacking.

Familiarity in friendship definitely breeds contempt. Women are more likely to find fault with each other – indeed could be accused of being devoted to doing so – but conversely rely on each other for support far more than the male of the species. Just watching my daughter's gang of nine-year-old school pals in action is a consummate lesson in emotional intensity, unnecessary friction and deep dependence – incompatible elements that remain present as our friendships mature.

In your situation I'd quit the emails and have a physical reunion. Try to rekindle some old fire by doing something fun together and if you're still feeling frustrated choose a timely moment to talk it out. Too often it's our own foibles that sow the seeds of frustration in others and you need to carefully consider what's making you so vulnerable before you point the finger of blame. Bear in mind that a dishonest friendship isn't worthy of further investment while an honest one offers a refuge for life, so in this instance you've got more to gain and nothing to lose by expressing your misgivings.

View the original article here

Should I tell my girlfriend that I'm addicted to flirting online?

'At some point you’ll hunger for flesh and blood instead of a keyboard at your fingertips': Mariella Frostrup offers a word of warning. Photograph: Alamy

The dilemma I am a 48-year-old man and have been with my partner for 28 years. We have a good and loving relationship and few worries.?Recently, however, I have started to use a chat room where I enjoy chatting and flirting with other women.?I have never done this in real life and have never felt the need to.?I am not sure this is really correct behaviour but am having great trouble stopping – not using the computer seems the only way. I have hinted at this to my partner, but have not told her everything as I am both a?bit ashamed and do not want to hurt her unnecessarily. Please can you offer any advice on how I can kick this habit.

Mariella replies Let's work out if you need to first. Flirting in cyberspace shouldn't necessarily sound the death knell for your relationship. You're only keeping up with the Jones's, as the saying goes.

From Facebook to Twitter, social media increasingly requires you to hone your skills at global seduction, inducing strangers and acquaintances to "friend" you for the world to admire. It turns out your real-world social life doesn't count for a?penny against the more measurable numbers attached to your online relationships. What harm can a bit of online chitchat do when the whole world is out there desperately trying to make connections? I know grown adults who squander hours honing pithy 140-character bon mots in the hope of going viral. If that isn't a form of foreplay, disguised as word play, I don't know what is. You're simply throwing your lot in with the great mass of humanity choosing to lead their lives virtually while around them their nearest and dearest atrophy… or do likewise.

As with everything else on the internet, chat rooms are child's play to access making it seem positively unfriendly not to pop in and say hello. I'll dodge pornography, on which I have lingered of late. But your reluctance to return to an activity you're ashamed of echoes the feelings of many who behave online in ways they would never entertain in their day-to-day lives.

I'd have to be a right old prude to frown on such innocent amusement. What you're up to would seem pretty harmless, enjoying no-strings sexual dialogue that adds some spice to your settled life. Plenty of men in relationships are out there doing it in real time and in real places, so many would argue that yours is a preferable option. But what does worry me is how your on-line activities are making you feel.

Some behaviour only becomes tangible when it's dragged from the shadows and exposed in daylight. You start by saying you enjoy your online activities. If this is your main response then you could invite your partner to join in. Perhaps a joint foray into fantasyland might introduce a revitalizing frisson to your relationship? On the other hand we all know about the perils of Pandora's box and opening doors you can't shut.

And you do also mention feeling shame and compulsion, which makes me wonder about the status of this new form of interaction. Is it replacing something you have lost or something you are missing? Either way you're unlikely to find satisfaction in cyberspace. At some point you'll hunger for flesh and blood instead of a keyboard at your fingertips. Total strangers whose personality is as much of a mystery as their sexuality are as ephemeral as ghosts. If your union is lacking spice, online chat won't provide anything more than a stop-gap before you go hunting the real thing. I've yet to encounter someone who remains content with fantasy flirtations forever. And, as we both know, this will eventually imperil your relationship.

What a pleasure to read about a union of 28 years' duration being good and loving – that's an achievement to be immensely proud of. Forget reaching 100, these days there should be telegrams from the Queen for every decade your partnership lasts. Such rock-solid foundations may offer room for experimentation, but few relationships can withstand the sort of solo voyaging you're currently embarked on. Do you want to throw away what you've built?

As an ex-smoker, every time I go into the newsagent I'm tempted to pick up a packet and if I could enjoy them online it would be an even harder vice to ignore as temptation would be almost constantly present. Just because something is available doesn't mean it shouldn't be declined. The way to kick any habit? Just say no.

If you have a dilemma, send a brief email to mariella.frostrup@observer.co.uk. To have your say on this week's column, go to guardian.co.uk/dearmariella. Follow Mariella on Twitter @mariellaf1

View the original article here

Should You Be Afraid Of Aging?

Getty Images

"Aging... is not a paramount male fear. But being seen as a loser is." 

The relationship between men’s sites like this one, and women’s sites like Jezebel or XOJane, is somewhat less than ideal. That’s because they think we are enormous douches.

From our perspective, though, we are simply speaking the way that men speak to each other in person, online. That’s the mandate that informs everything that we do. The missions of sites like AskMen and sites like Jezebel are near-identical; it’s just that men (and not just “the bad sort of men,” but men in general) and women are not.

There is no shortage of men’s sites willing to call out their female counterparts as harshly as they do us. We are sure that a lot of our readers are aware, for instance, of names like “Chateau Heartiste” or “RooshV.” As satisfying as this can be, though, it doesn’t do anything for the culture as a whole.

For a million reasons relating to fragmentation of media ownership, political expediency and sheer human biliousness, we are constantly being manipulated into fiercely oppositional camps: liberals vs. conservatives, red vs. blue, urban vs. rural. There is a culture war going on, or being made to go on, and it is killing our ability to speak to each other.

This, in part, is why we’re ignoring the epiphenomena of man-site vs. woman-site hostility in order to look at the discussion surrounding Elizabeth Wurtzel’s recent piece for The Atlantic on aging.

Let’s sum it up, if we can: Elizabeth Wurtzel goes to cool Brooklyn parties where men express disbelief that she has been alive for 45 years. Her secret, she feels, has something to do with being childless, politically liberal and defiant in a very general sense.

In response, Jezebel writer Tracy Moore notes that while it’s fun when Wurtzel acts so Wurtzely, denial may not be a universally satisfying solution to the fact that we all grow older and die. In passing, Moore also states that “it’s harder for women to age.” Is it?

We suspect that it is. For a pretty broad array of reasons (some ?cultural, more ?evolutionary), women are judged by their youthfulness, for which beauty is a proxy, more than men are, with the closest analogue on our side being wealth or prominence.

One of the things that distinguishes (we’re being general here because there are about three billion of us) the male dialogue from its female counterpart is its (sometimes blinkered) pragmatism. For whatever reason, we tend to speak about injustice- or imbalance-containing problems in a way that ignores the moral question in favor of directives on how to make it work. This is the reason, for example, that a site like AskMen’s “Power & Money” section is full of articles like “10 Ways To Think Like A CEO” and “How To Stay Out Of Debt,” rather than things like “It Happened To Me: She Judged Me For My Money.”

It’s not that we don’t experience life in the negative -- we do, and very acutely. It’s just that our taboo-structure, or our internal culture, contains this strong sense that to dwell on a bad feeling is to create the conditions for its re-occurrence. Out of this grows a generalized preference for advice over confession, and also something that can appear to women as shallowness.

It isn’t likely that a man would derive the same pleasure (and the same discursive ability) from an age-related compliment as Elizabeth Wurtzel has. Aging, or more directly, being seen by potential sex partners as “old,” is not a paramount male fear. But being seen as a loser is. Next Page >>

View the original article here

How You Should Remember Your Parents When They're Gone

Getty Images

"You are only a?family?for a relatively short time -- usually about 20 years." 

When I was a teenager in Holland, a Dutch band called Doe Maar had a song entitled "Pa." The first lines, about a father, go something like this:

Sitting there now, your hair nearly white
The wrinkles on your hands
So friendly and soft, who’d ever have thought
You’ve changed so much
I didn’t become what you wanted…

At the time, the song meant nothing to me. My parents then were towering figures, in their prime. I hadn’t thought about the song in 30 years. But since my mother died last month, Doe Maar’s lines have been running through my head. They are helping me understand how to remember one’s parents.

My mum had been ill for over 10 years. By the end, there was little left of her. In Doe Maar’s words, she had “changed so much.” It’s not the memory I want of her. Better to remember parents as they were in their prime, when you were a kid.

In the weeks since the funeral, I’ve been looking at old pictures, as you do. There’s one of her young and beautiful and made up in London 40 years ago, about to go out for the evening after putting me to bed. Or there’s her in a sunlit garden with my late grandparents and me: a baby who looks a bit too much like Winston Churchill, but could still blossom into anything other than a cantankerous middle-aged journalist. Or there’s the strongest memory of her I have, no doubt inspired by an old photograph: the day she and I made a papier-mache mask together in the house in Jamaica where we were living then. I must have been 3. I still remember my surprise at discovering that you baked the thing in the oven, like a cake.

You are only a family for a relatively short time -- usually about 20 years. In that time, much of what the family is trying to do is lay down memories. The aim is to leave all family members, but especially the kids, with snapshots of happiness for them to look back on after everyone goes their own way. When the children leave home, the family effectively dissolves, even in cases in which the parents are still alive and together. The day my mum and I made the mask together, we were laying down memories, even if neither of us knew it.

Now I’m doing it with my own children. Of course, lots of their memories won’t be good: me going purple with frustration in the morning, scraping Weetabix off the living-room carpet as they take five minutes too long to get dressed for school. And only partly because my generation had children late, my kids won’t remember me young and beautiful the way I do my mother.

But every now and then, there’s a day that works, when in the evening they lie in bed awake, staring at the ceiling trying to make sense of some wondrous outing we had together. That’s how I want them to remember me -- and not as the poor dying animal that I’m going to be.

View the original article here