-
-
Ad Space
(728 x 90)
-
-
Let's get it on...
Quickie central
Get Naked
Sexpert Jamie Bufalino on...
Quizzes and polls
Sites we like
-
Ad Space
(120 x 240)
-
Julia Allison on Dating
Illustration: Emily FlakeEDITOR’S NOTE: We at TONY love Julia. But not everyone else does. In fact, if you read media-gossip sites like Gawker, you’ll find that quite a few people really, really don’t like Julia. And a lot of her detractors seem pretty sure they could do a better job as dating columnist.
Knowing how hard it is to be funny and informative about one of the most picked-over topics on earth, we got to thinking: What if we plucked one of Julia’s toughest critics off the commenting rolls at Gawker and gave them a shot to show up our girl? Julia readily agreed to the challenge, so we tapped Ella Good, whose snippy quips promised major fireworks: of Julia, she wrote, “Her thrown-together-in-eight-seconds ‘articles’ while in the greenroom of Red Eye are like the ‘use a scrunchie while giving head’ version of a dating column.” Ouch.
Below, we give you the cage match. Both ladies took on the same topic—Temporary Rational Abstinence (Julia’s choice)—and got the same 500 words to do it. And if you think you can do better still, bring it on: Send us your column at dating@timeoutny.com.
By Ella Good
It happens to most women. After months, if not years, of dating disappointments, we impose sanctions on our sexuality. We start to think that the lapse between the first date and the first night together is some sort of equation that will determine the health of our relationships. It’s a mild form of OCD as we begin to believe that if we prolong the wait for sex longer than we have before, we’ll find the love that has eluded us. Sure, a good man will wait for a woman to be ready, but does that mean the wrong man won’t do the same?
After a binge of bad relationships, my friend Anne has decided that sex too soon is a big reason she’s still single. “When I sleep with a guy after one or two dates, I think I’m sending the message that I’m not looking for anything serious,” she says. “It changes the dynamic too quickly, and there’s no taking back the mystery.” She recently started seeing someone who shows promise, and she’s made the decision to stay celibate for as long as possible. “I’ve vowed not to invite him up to my apartment for at least a month. I also wear old underwear that I don’t want him to see.”
I’m guilty of the same behavior. In the past I’ve blamed my dating failures on being too eager to consummate. “If I’d just made him wait a few more weeks…” is something I’ve said to myself often. But truthfully, would those relationships have worked out if I hadn’t invited the men to spend the night one date too soon? Would it have negated later arguments and disappointments that stemmed from things way outside the bedroom? No. But when people find themselves engaging in any sort of pattern, they immediately jump to the conclusion that it is their own behavior that’s doing them in.
I know a happily married woman who slept with her now husband on the first date. The next morning she thought she had doomed the whole affair, that nothing substantial would come of it. The fact was—and still is—that it wasn’t a bad decision. Sex didn’t destroy their chemistry or make it burn out too soon. She wrestled with her choice for months, always holding on to the belief that maybe not waiting meant the relationship had started off on the wrong foot.
So what does it mean? Is a first date that ends in the morning a bad thing? Does waiting a predetermined amount of time to have sex equal a better future together? I doubt it either way. Temporary abstinence can act as a good charade and make one feel as though one is in control of her own destiny. But the bottom line is, good things don’t necessarily come to those who wait.
Ella Good is a freelance writer. She keeps a blog at take-a-memo.blogspot.com.By Julia Allison
Most people think there are two types of abstinence: (1) the no-one-wants-to-have-sex-with-you kind (e.g., 40-Year-Old Virgin) and (2) the I’m-saving-myself-for-God-or-marriage kind (e.g., nuns and observant Catholics).
I think there should be a third type of celibacy: Temporary Rational Abstinence. In other words, you choose not to have sex for a period of time, voluntarily. Women who make this choice generally cite a desire to make emotionally healthy decisions and to focus on themselves (not on pleasing guys). Or maybe they just want to develop a relationship without the complications of physical intimacy. One wrote, “Without the emotional, spiritual and mental parts, sex was meaningless. Like cold cereal. After it was over, I still felt empty.” The length of her TRA? Now 18 months.
But ladies holding off on consummation isn’t a shocking revelation—we’re taught to be careful about our sexual choices from a very young age. (I spent 2001 in TRA mode, as well as this past summer, and no one thought anything of it.) When I sent out a survey asking whether readers had ever made a conscious decision to stop having sex for a period of time, I assumed I would receive eager replies—from women, since, as my friend Matt sneered, “Men never voluntarily choose abstinence.”
Mark, 44, an electrical contractor, begs to differ—he’s gone up to six months sex-free. “I was very unhappy with who I was having relations with and my reasons for having them. I wanted to reflect about where I was in my life. It’s really the best decision I’ve made in a long time. I realized that sex was the driving force in the relationship, when actually it should have been so much more! I’m as sex starved as the bum down the street, but priorities need to be in place.”
Mark isn’t the only guy who feels this way—in fact, a lot of men responded with similar concerns. Brent, 25, a writer, has done TRA several times. “Every female relationship I happened to have at that time was way too stressful. Mainly, my brain was getting cloudy and confused by getting pulled in 90 different directions at once, so I figured if I took a vow of abstinence, then I could reboot.” Did he regret it? Hell no. “Relationships, without question, get simpler when you take sex out of the equation altogether…but it’s not until then that you realize how horny you really are!”Eric, 28, a driver, said something that could have just as easily come from the average XX. He abstained for a time because “there was no meaning in it. When I was younger, that was fine. But when you get older, you want the sex to be more than wham! bam! thank you ma’am.”
One fellow cited an excellent rationale for the TRA he’s explored with his girlfriend. “If she broke up with me today, at least I would know that the reason the relationship didn’t last wasn’t because I was bad in the sack!”
Well, that’s something.
E-mail her at julia@timeoutny.com.To view the results of Julia's survey on why people abstain from sex, please click through to page 2 below. And leave us a comment on the literary duel between Julia and Ella. We want to know what you think!
Time Out New York / Issue 627 : Oct 4–10, 2007
Leave a comment
-
-
- Subscribe now and save 90%!
- For just $19.97 a year, you'll get hundreds of listings and free events each week, plus our special issues and guides, including Cheap Eats, Great Spas, Fall Preview, Holiday Gift Guide and more!
-
- Time Out New York respects your privacy. We will only use your e-mail address in order to contact you regarding to your subscription and to send you our weekly e-newsletter. We will not share this information with anyone.
-
-
Ad Space
(320 x 53)
Ad Space
(300 x 250)
-
Sex + Dating events
-
Most viewed in Sex & Dating
-
Ad Space
(160 x 600)
Ad Space
(160 x 600)
-
- Visit our sister sites:
- Time Out New York Kids
- Time Out Chicago
- Time Out London
- Time Out Worldwide
Now, these two short pieces are all I have to go on for either writer, but based on first impressions...I found Julia's more enjoyable to read- snappier, quicker, more to the point. People are complaining about her overuse of quotes, but honestly, this is a dating column, not an academic paper or even a news piece- in this context, I'd rather hear about people's thoughts and experiences than one person's idea of "the facts."
Ella is a writer. Julia is not. Funny how her choice of topic is merely described as her "thought" which is concluded by the fact that men actually agree with her. Wow. That's something alright...
And come on, if one were to do a genuine word-count on Julia's article it would be clear how little she actually conceives and writes herself and how much she relies on quotes from her inbox. I can't believe people like her pull a wage for this. . . .
I want to ball up Julia's article and toss it in the wastebasket. Her prose is too prolix.
Ella's comments have a lot of insight and more continuity than the quotations assembled in Julia's column. Julia's isn't bad, but Ella's is simply better.
Neither is really that exciting (maybe it's the topic, like others keep mentioning...). But, Julia's was over 50% boring quotes from the mouths of people I don't care about -- 3 guys?? -- we all already know what guys think about sex (i.e., these guys sound like they're full of s**t). At least Ella's writing was compelling enough to make you read to the end. I don't hate Julia and don't know where all the hatred is stemming from, but when you can't make 500 words about sex(!) interesting, maybe it's time to put the column to sleep.
Ella Good wins this one. Julia's a fifties throwback - Ella gives the subject (a tired one true) a relatively modern spin. Sex, food, alcohol, none of them are the problem. Using them to solve your problems? That's the problem. Abstinence is just the flip side of the coin.
So that's it? Julia gets walloped by Ella and she gets to keep her column? The fix is in, man. She wants to write about getting dumped? Fire her.
Julia's columns are consistently vapid and offer no insight whatsoever beyond hackneyed observations and quips from the latest Collegehumor.com founder she's sharing her bed with.
Fair enough if you're not a julia allison fan, but NO ONE should think "Temporary abstinence can act as a good charade and make one feel as though one is in control of her own destiny" is sparkling, witty prose! This sentence sounds like a poorly written master's thesis.
this should be such a great, fun, engaging column that you always want to read, but i just find julia's column dull. i usually don't finish it and now never read it. the topics are dull, the writing is dull- i guess her photo is supposed to showcase her boobs- but that's another story. as to the column i say dull, dull, dull... can't time out do better?
Neither writer fails to come to the root of this problem, in that the use of "TRA," whether used as a means to not sleep with anyone, or as a means to delay with sleeping with a prospective partner, is self-imposed, and is purely based on reaction to one's own past sexual activity. This includes one night stands, and other similar forms of post-sexual regret ("I can't believe I slept with him/her"). In other words, it's used to raise one's self worth (whether mentally, spiritually or otherwise) in his/her own eyes, in an attempt to make up for one's own past sexual transgressions. Kudos to Ella Good (nice pen name, by the way) for somewhat diving into this topic, while Julia simply cited examples without much commentary or thought. I also find it hard to believe that a 44 year old man would self-impose "TRA." In all honesty, when and how often does he (or almost any man, really) expect to have sex again in the future? Find a better example than a 44 year old electrical contractor (without trying to sound harsh and crude, makes me think of a 5'10" 275 lb. plumber with his butt crack hanging out of his jeans) who might need Viagra the next time he is a with a partner. And whether he needs Viagra (or simply can't get it up) or plays the "TRA" card will only lead his/her partner(s) to having those same feelings of regret, but this time it will be "Why won't he/she sleep with me?"
Ella's is a tired version of every college sex column exeunt: anecdote, anecdote, rhetorical question, one-liner ending. At least JA is consistent. That said, Julia needs to stop trying to make fetch happen! (e.g. "TRA"? This is not a real acronym. Stop trying to make it so.)
Well, I don't HATE Julia. I read her blog and usually like it. But I do think the column is pretty bad. Again, her blog shows decent writing so this isn't a lost cause but doesn't she have an editor that can tell her a whole piece on people's nicknames isn't that riveting? Anyways, Ella's article is better and Julia's sucks etc etc BUT I do wonder if there is anyone that can write well on this topic on a regular basis. Maybe Ella should send another column in next week and show if she's consistent? I doubt it...the whole idea of a dating column is kinda tired.
Julia Allison makes my stomach turn -- the stunning self-absorption (screen shots from the morning shows on her blog!!), the minutiae of her relationship with some freak no one knows or cares about (played out breathlessly as if they're brangelina), all followed up with warmed over, half-thought-out "notions" in her columns. This latest one read like a slumber party with too many boxes if wine. "Oh my God, you guys, I've gotta write this column, who can get some, like, guys on the phone with, like, blurbs?" Ella's piece, on the other hand, was a well-reasoned, interestingly contratrian point of view, with smart (yes, funny) and unexpected points of view. My money's on Ella -- mostly because it was ON TOPIC in an interestingly askew way. Maybe if Julia could actually write a column that wasn't about HERSELF we'd be getting somehere. Exile Julia to pour coffee forMike and Juliette. We want to hear what Ella has to say.
I don't think Ella wrote about the topic, she actually wrote about the pros and cons of havcing sex too soon in a relationship, whereas Julia wrote about the "assigned" topic: taking a break from sex in a conscious manner. The male angle made it very interesting - I had no idea guys might want to try it, too. I vote for Julia.
I abstained from sex for nearly five minutes reading these two articles. Ella Good wins, pants down.
Julia hands down. Love her. I think the negative comments or votes are haters / jealous probably. She gave a different perspective vs what most people who automatically would know what the reply would be.
I actually like Julia Allison - if only because people are so unnecessary snarky about her. I mean seriously if you're not a fan then cool, no need to insult her. Just move on with your lives. Having said that I do think Ella's column was better - it speaks to the reader rather than at the reader (as Julia's does). But if we're being brutal, I'm gonna have to say a dating column feels too old-hat anyway. It's like you're trying to reinvent the stagecoach. Give Julia a girl about town column or something.
I'll try this again, because TONY's web site sucks almost as much as Julia Allison. Her 1980s sitcom observations are trite and boring. Wow, shoes, dogs, pickup lines. Good stuff. Can't wait for the column on why guys leave the toilet seat up. Get rid of this column and use the space to advertise Sex and the City DVDs because Ms. Allison has nothing to contribute. Good riddance.
Thank you for the chance to get rid of Julia Allison. Her hack 80s sitcom observations (shoes! dogs! pickup lines!) are a waste of space. I can't wait for her column on why guys leave the toilet seat up. Either get a new dating columnist or use that space to run ads for Sex and the City DVDs, because Ms. Allison has nothing to contribute. Good riddance.
Keep Ella, lose Julia! Ella's column was interestingly written; Julia's was poorly linked quotes from guys...I suspect she uses the excuse of "writing a column" as a boy-meeting icebreaker. LAME.
Ella 's a way better writer. TONY, dont loose her!
Ella's column was entertaining, truthful, and insightful, and it leaves me wanting more of her thoughts and insights.....ELLA is better for sure!
ella good gave a balanced view.. as for the rhetorical questions? excellent! i'd rather an author include the reader in the article than hear JA rant about her experiences of TRA.
ella good's contribution consisted almost exclusively of questions, none of which she endeavors to answer. not exactly what i would call informative. while i can honestly say that i am WAY more interested in a sex column (thank you, jamie) than a column on dating (which seems both annoyingly female and annoyingly new york), i feel that most of the criiticism focused at julia is manifested in jealousy that she's both good looking and fortunate enough to have her own column at TONY. is she great? no. is she better than ella good? most definitely.
ella good is hella better. that julia allison column is worthless. ella good gets to the point and keeps you reading.
This dating column is insipid week after week. You took away the horoscopes for this?!?! Who the f*ck cares? People are dumb and this is just more proof.
ella is a GREAT WRITER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! love the artical u should be on staff