Seavey Personal Ad

Seavey online picWith any luck, I’ll find myself in a steady relationship any day now, and this ad won’t be necessary — but it’s sort of funny, so let’s at least post it for now, and perhaps permanently if it proves popular enough:

Who needs online dating services? Eschewing the needlessly complicated dating sites, which I’m told offer an array of dating-candidates who are not Todd Seavey — potentially causing women to become confused and end up with the wrong guy — ToddSeavey.com offers the one dating option that can bring true happiness: Todd Seavey. But first, you must read the rules below.

—–

Ten Rules for Dating Todd

1. Sane chicks are hot.

Do you often find yourself saying, “Why does everything have to be rational all the time?”

Do you ever end an argument by saying, “Just because it’s more logical doesn’t mean it’s right?”

Do you cry sometimes without knowing why, or without being able to explain why “in words”?

Do you hear voices in your head, whether human or divine?

Do you believe yourself to be “highly intuitive” even when you have been repeatedly proven wrong or have no evidence that your intuited judgments proved to be accurate?

Do you become sullen and uncommunicative when people say things with which you disagree?

Do you claim to desperately wish that you were thin yet continue to eat enough food to keep you fat?

Do you claim to be fat despite numerous people, perhaps including doctors, telling you that you are underweight and may have anorexia?

Do you have any other condition qualifying as “an eating disorder”?

Do you sometimes treat innocent others sadistically?

Do you often find yourself using phrases such as “It’s just a really confusing time for me emotionally,” “I’m having trouble thinking lately,” or “Something makes me think they’re all against me, even though they’re being nice”?

Do you think it’s acceptable to have contradictory ideas? Or acceptable to express anger toward people who point out that you have said one thing yet done another? Or acceptable to express anger at others because you have consciously chosen a course of action completely at odds with your main goal and are now suffering for it?

Are you on, or have you ever been on, antidepressants or antipsychotic medication? (Or have you been urged by a medical professional to go on such medication?)

Do you think “emotional self-discipline” is a contradiction in terms, or even that it is an undesirable quality?

Do you get angry when people “take you at your word,” say, expecting you to show up when you said you would, expecting you to call if you said you’d call, or otherwise expecting you to behave as if you have integrity even in small things?

Do you like to think of yourself as a “zany and offbeat thinker” who defies the usual linear rules of thought?

Do you like to see others suffer when you are having a bad day?

Do you let off steam by picking fights over nothing, even with people who try to seek a compromise with you?

Do you lie in order to avoid conflicts, even though by doing so you increase the odds of a more significant later conflict?

Do you think that a given statement must be true if you “feel strongly” about the underlying issue? (For instance, that God must exist because you feel passionately about religion, or that socialism or welfare-statism must be superior to capitalism as a means of ensuring human happiness because you have cared deeply about socialism or welfare-statism for many years?)

If you answered “yes” to any of these questions, you may be insane and probably shouldn’t date me (I’m sure many of you would hasten to add “I wouldn’t dream of it!” and that’s good — you’re being wise, for once). This is not to say that you are a bad person — you may even be better than average in many ways, or at least better than the average woman — but you are not the sort of reasonable, level-headed, mild-mannered person with whom another reasonable, level-headed, mild-mannered person like myself ought to spend a lot of time.

If you answered “no” to all these questions, there may be hope of us getting along and even building a romantic relationship. But read on and learn the other nine Rules for Dating Todd.

—–

2. If you (a) do not want children or (b) are willing to accept the fact that I will never want children and that therefore if you do, you must be prepared to have only a non-permanent relationship with me, we may be able to build a romantic relationship (no, I do not want to adopt, part-time parent, co-parent, see kids on weekends, or indeed be around kids, whether genetically related or unrelated to me, in any imaginable capacity whatsoever, nor date a women who has kids secreted away somewhere who she promises will “rarely” interact with me).

3. Do you accept the fact that your future boyfriend may have many friends, both female and male, who will not cease to exist simply because you start dating said boyfriend, and are you able to be kind and open toward said friends, including the females, even if in some cases they are ex-girlfriends? If so, we may be able to build a romantic relationship.

4. Are you capable of having an argument on an intellectual point of disagreement without eventually claiming that your feelings have been hurt by the disagreement or claiming that if your opponent persists in (politely) differing with you — if you insist on asking — he must “not be respecting” your opinion? If so, we may be able to build a romantic relationship.

5. Is your IQ, if it has been tested, significantly above average (average being approximately 100)? If so, we may be able to build a romantic relationship.

6. Would you agree that no one is born into this world “owing” you anything, whether an investment of time or money, and that as long as no one is actively harming you or taking things away from you without your permission, the world is treating you fairly? (That is, do you think it’s absurd when people claim to “deserve” a nice vacation or a fancy home or other, often shallow yuppie indulgences without having earned them?) If so, we may be able to build a romantic relationship.

7. Are you able to get along with people who disagree with you on a variety of issues, such as politics and religion, assuming they are willing to discuss such matters intelligently and civilly? If so, we may be able to build a romantic relationship.

8. Are you aware that every single person alive has a different set of preferences from your own, and that what seems “fun” or even “necessary” to you may not generate enthusiasm in other people, even those close to you, and that they are under no moral obligation to share your enthusiasm? Can you avoid sulking if other people fail to share that enthusiasm, so long as they are polite about it? If so, we may be able to build a romantic relationship.

9. Do you think happiness is a fairly natural state — the most important one, in fact — and one easily achieved if people simply calm down and avoid creating insanity, hostility, or trouble? If so, we may be able to build a romantic relationship.

10. If you answered as suggested to all the questions above, are an undeformed female, and are somewhere below the age of menopause (not that I’m knocking the various hot older women I’ve met, but we ought to think long-term here), then let’s consider building a romantic relationship.

—–

As you may have guessed, I have encountered some “mentally special” women over the years and am keen to avoid a repeat performance. Though I’m opinionated in a few select areas, I am nonetheless easy-going, happy to disagree (as long as things remain civil and we can comfortably talk about anything), and very easily entertained (I have never understood why solitary confinement is considered a threat). A sofa and a good book seems to me as close to paradise as one could reasonably ask for, in a world where people are often eager, it seems, to go to great lengths and effort simply to make themselves miserable in a more ritzy, political, “intense,” popular, noisy, or exotic setting. That is not to say I would complain at all about indulging in things I don’t naturally seek out — being willing to try new things and willing to find pleasure in your mate’s favorite things are both important — but I do not approach life with a long wish list of mandatory items meant to prove social status, show off, “experience [fill in the blank] for myself,” or get back at my enemies. I just need sanity, and some peace and quiet (if you often find yourself, eyes bugging out and jaw hanging, saying things like “What do you mean you don’t [ski, read your horoscope, smoke pot, enjoy massage, admire Al Gore, what have you]?” and then having difficulty continuing the conversation or imagining further contact with the person you’re talking to, best to just nip things in the bud rather than dating this non-religious, pro-capitalist, anti-sports, child-averse, non-skiing, crowded-bar-avoiding man — and consider developing an imagination, which will prove useful in all sorts of situations and might even boost your income, enabling you to do more skiing).

Unlike most women, who seem to think that a romantic relationship is sort of an “anything goes” zone into which to spew all the simmering madness kept at bay during the day when out in public, I hope you agree with me that a relationship should be a haven of logic and sanity in often deranged and overheated world.

Care to join me — instead of taking all this as a challenge to change, defeat, or “counterbalance” me?

I should confess that I might be bad at enjoying some of the things that average people enjoy, and I say this only reluctantly and as a result of past negative experiences. So, for instance, most New Yorkers, from what I can tell, seem to prefer noisy or crowded bars, where carrying on complex or nuanced conversations is difficult, to quiet or unpopular ones where the calm allows for contemplation and easy discourse. It is all too common for women to conclude “You’re no fun!” if you don’t share their precise notion of fun, that notion usually involving a lot of hooting and hollering; some unsubtle dancing to atrocious, booming music; and perhaps some drunken flirting facilitated by a complete lack of long-term planning or awareness of the future. I’ll pass, thanks.

By contrast, and I say this without taking any joy in sounding smug, I think the world is by and large too noisy, too busy, too stupid, too unreflective, too irrational, and almost completely lacking in dignity or self-restraint. If you would rather “par-tay” than parlez, we are likely not on the same wavelength. If you think the world needs far more lecture series, debates, places for intelligent conversation, peace and quiet, and noble reserve instead of zany free-spirited hippie-slut throbbin’ funkiness, you may want what I want, and we will likely greet each other with great relief after too many decades of weary acceptance of this world’s low standards.

Surely there’s a woman out there somewhere who has long been thinking along these same lines — instead of thinking “I just want to stop having to think and plan all the time and go nuts once in a while!” — a woman who suspects that we could rule the world together, or merely be happy together.

—–

Oh, but one last thing — and this is very important. Are you the sort of person who says “yes” when asked to do something with a fella, regardless of whether you actually want to go out, then simply keeps rescheduling instead of definitively and finally canceling the date or saying no? Do you do this despite having attained the age of legal adulthood? Do you tell yourself that you’re nonetheless a moral person — even the hero in life’s little narrative — because, each and every time you rescheduled and feigned enthusiasm for getting together “first thing next week” (or maybe even later that very night if you’re a particularly brazen and skilled actress), you thought, “I’m faced with an awkward moment, so I’ll just keep turning it into a positive one, for the time being, by lying…over and over again! That’s the thing to do!”

I don’t really care if you vow never to do this to me — that isn’t good enough. If you’ve ever done this to anyone — wasting not only your time and the fella’s but the time of all the other people whose schedules were disrupted by your lies, from restaurant staffs dealing with canceled reservations to other people who might have met with the fella on the nights blocked out for your illusory outings — you are, I am afraid, a terrible, selfish fiend of a human being, and I really don’t want you as a friend, let alone a date or girlfriend. Yes, that’s right — you are evil. How does it feel — the evil, I mean? Bet you thought being a Hitler or a Jack the Ripper would feel a lot different than being you. But it doesn’t. You’re living the being-evil experience. Please live it without me, though.

I don’t care if you’ve been declared by numerous glossy magazines to be the most beautiful woman not only of our era but of all time. I don’t care if your intellect is so vastly superior to my own that mere moments of conversation with you would fill me with awe and wonder. You are still, as noted above, an immoral, inconsiderate fiend. I can do better, thanks. And when I say “do better,” I don’t even mean that there’s necessarily a woman on the planet above this sort of time-wasting, juvenile behavior. Maybe there isn’t — but I would still be doing better, you see, by living out the rest of my days alone than by dating you. So please, please — please! — if you lack ethics, stay very, very far away. And while you’re there (far away, that is), think about what went wrong in your upbringing, your genetics, or the culture at large to turn you into the monster you have become. It’s dealing with jerks like you that inspires serial killers and misanthropes, you know. Can you really blame them?

Non-monster lady, on the other hand, if you’re out there, drop me a line. If you’re smart, you know how necessary this personal ad’s various complaints are and won’t be put off by them. If you’re not smart, well, a universe of singles bars and online dating sites awaits you, so go to it, missy, and good luck!

(Or more briefly: 5′9″, 180 lbs., blonde, Brown alum, writer-editor, likes cats and dogs but owns neither. Will not have children. Enjoys philosophy and New Wave music.)

UPDATE 12/23/07: Well, in defiance of the critics — though admittedly with no help from this personal ad — I found a wonderful girlfriend, about whom you can read here, shortly after this ad went up, and though we didn’t quite end up together permanently, I now view this ad as largely a venting of complaints left over from before her time, not necessarily a blueprint for the future — but I still will never have kids (a few things are non-negotiable).

49 Responses to Seavey Personal Ad

  1. I’ve found you a lady, Todd.

    Careful, she’s already a bit of a blog celeb.

    ;)

    Red Stapler | 11:26 am on the 19th of April, 2007

  2. And she just recently posted about the importance of security measures for keeping safe one’s red stapler, so she addresses your needs as well.

    Unfortunately, she also addresses the needs of a boyfriend referred to as “GK” — presumably not a resurrected G.K. Chesterton, as he would violate her atheism requirement (unless his views have changed since dying — he was a smart guy). Legal technicalities and bureaucratic mumbo-jumbo forbid me to kill this “GK,” so we must look elsewhere, but she is certainly a good model to keep in mind.

    Todd Seavey | 12:16 pm on the 19th of April, 2007

  3. […] I mentioned my opposition to feminism in an earlier post called “Brief Statement of Principles,” which is now also posted as one of the Permanent Things in my right margin, as is my half-joking Personal Ad — something you should read instead of the current post if you happen to be a feminist who might be willing to date me but will cease to be willing if you read my denunciation of feminism. Also among the Permanent Things is information on the monthly Debates at Lolita Bar that I organize and host, which next month (May 2) will feature an intra-feminist argument between comedian-debaters Charles Star and Jen Dziura over the question “Does the Beauty Industry Oppress Women?” So come hear them and, if the current blog entry upsets or inspires you, come give me a piece of your mind while you’re at it. […]

    ToddSeavey.com » Blog Archive » Aborting Feminism, Adding Links | 7:43 pm on the 21st of April, 2007

  4. Todd, I like to think of myself as a logical person. I might even say I’ve won awards for being logical. I have, in fact, studied predicate logic at a well-known university. But you’re never going to get all that in a woman. I’ll bet you ten dollars you can’t get all that. Here’s how the bet works: you have to get married, and then, say, eighteen months later, once the honeymoon’s over, if you still insist you’ve found all of the above, I will happily give you ten dollars, and also debate your wife on any topic, and, presumably, lose.

    Wow, that is one mother of a personal ad.

    Jennifer Dziura | 8:58 pm on the 21st of April, 2007

  5. Todd, if I were a woman, I’d date you.

    I may also ask you to write my online personal, since your skills in such matters are superior to mine.

    T.A.B. | 9:15 pm on the 21st of April, 2007

  6. Well, my future wife may not exist, but at least we’ve established that Jen D. is cool. Thanks a lot. I’m pleased to see she’s writing an essay (for a gig she may first have heard about here) contrasting Voltaire and Voltron, by the way. Since I don’t want kids, I’m always trying to convince other people to name their kids Voltaire. Or Groucho. Probably my two favorite pseudonyms, not to mention two of my favorite people (flaws aside).

    Todd Seavey | 10:02 am on the 22nd of April, 2007

  7. […] There’s F-train, who plans to keep his grandma alive forever (funny story, my mom is no longer so much interested in my getting married as much as she wants me to have kids, like immediately) and then there’s Todd Seavey who had me cracking up for a good ten minutes with his personal ad: […]

    Clareified » Blog Archive » Seems like relationships are the topic du jour… | 12:21 pm on the 24th of April, 2007

  8. Todd, I see an area of hypocracy in your requirements.
    You imply that you are looking to meet a female (the existance of the personal ad implies such) to partner with. You also extensively expect her to be sane. Yet, your implication that such a woman exists who meets your sanity criteria goes against the very empiricism that you champion elsewhere. And you question her sanity?

    Dave | 1:52 pm on the 24th of April, 2007

  9. Todd, your approach to the dame o’ your dreams is, how shall I put this, kind of fucked up. You don’t go looking for them and testing them about politics and feelings and all that there. You go out a little more, I know, skip the bars, there’s about a million alternatives to bars, if, you are such an intellectual as you believe. You don’t want kids. I get it. Say it again if it makes you feel better. Me, I’ve had eight, and I wouldn’t change a thing. My kids have made me happier, and I have enjoyed them more than anything else I have encountered in this world. But having an ivy-league college degree puts you at distinct disadvantage. You’re a member of the human race, not the ideas and concepts race. Not the rumination and reflections and retroflections race. The blood, guts, steel, broken glass, limited warranty, the shit just hit the fan and good night sleep and hot meal race. Have you ever really lived? I mean like on the edge of your life lived? Think that one over. Live is risk and death and war and taxes, and one big mess and a beauty all at the same time. Brother, you ain’t got time for all that nuance and pneumbras, and you don’t know how much time you got left. I ain’t saying go for the first skirt that you like the looks of, I’m saying stop trying so damn hard. Go meet women, look em’ over, talk with them, and if you’re intrigued, meet them again. But learn to be casual. They can spot a desperate man a mile away, and lots of them are just looking for someone’s life to ruin, for fun. Learn how to be slightly bored with them. Don’t tell them your life story, don’t tell them anything they don’t ask for, and even then, give em’ the bare facts. If they’re not curious, they’ll drift on to someone else to be parasitical with. You don’t attract dames with stories about how you love peace and quiet and a good book. You attract them by being a question mark. Don’t be afraid to give em’ the brush. Remember, you’re a busy man. Most of them out there, aren’t worth a damn. You need a dame that’s hot blooded, passionate, smart, strong, and one that thinks the worst thing that can happen is to be thought a fool. And she has a sense of timing for each of those things. Last but not least, stop worrying about it. If it’s gonna happen, it’s gonna happen. You CAN’T make it happen. A thing is there, or it is not. You’ll know it when you encounter it, unless you’re in the habit of lying to yourself. Take your life with the two hands you’ve got and tear off what you want. That’s what everyone else around you is doing, and brother if you come to the barbecue and leave with clean hands, it’s nobody’s fault but yours.

    Sean | 9:41 am on the 25th of April, 2007

  10. That’s some truly funny shit. I’m printing Rule #1 and giving it to all my female friends. I’m married, but those are just good rules of thumb for who to associate with!

    Falstaff | 11:16 am on the 25th of April, 2007

  11. Todd, I would date you if you were a gay guy. Darn. Darn. Darn.

    Gay Guy | 12:44 am on the 26th of April, 2007

  12. […] http://toddseavey.com/seavey-personal-ad… […]

    dispatches from TJICistan » Blog Archive » Rules for Dating Todd | 8:16 am on the 27th of April, 2007

  13. […] Great minds think alike. […]

    The State of the Beat » Blog Archive » Rules for Dating Todd | 3:43 pm on the 27th of April, 2007

  14. Mmmm, some of this goes without saying, but the word “sane” comes up a lot here, and I noticed that men are always calling women “crazy” when they decide they are through with them.

    This is because men often MAKE women crazy with the obnoxious, unfair or jerky things they do, and women are often so eager to fix things that they work themselves up into a frustrated emotional state. If men had to put up with the shit that women did, men would cry more and act strange, too.

    Can it be that, perhaps, not everything can be explained fully RIGHT AT THE MOMENT THAT IT IS FELT and sometimes you need to kind of give a little in order to understand someone’s bigger picture?

    You may miss out on some really great people if you start picking them apart based on nonsense. Girls do cry more than boys do. Sometimes they have trouble explaining why.

    Finally, this is laughable, in terms of the rest: “Do you think happiness is a fairly natural state — the most important one, in fact”

    For all your claims of being rational, now you are being a hypocrite. The second part may be true - it IS important to be happy, or try to be happy. but is it the “natural” state? Or is mere contentedness more natural? If, say, you woke up one day and pretty much had nothing and no hope, but you also didn’t have anything bad happening in your life, would that make you happy??? By rational science, happiness is NOT natural - it is something to work toward and be thankful for.

    Reading your ad makes me naturally unhappy.

    Giana v. | 5:51 pm on the 27th of April, 2007

  15. Women are irrational, that’s all there is to that!
    There heads are full of cotton, hay, and rags!
    They’re nothing but exasperating, irritating,
    vacillating, calculating, agitating,
    Maddening and infuriating hags!

    Pickering, why can’t a woman be more like a man?
    (Hmm?)

    Yes…
    Why can’t a woman be more like a man?
    Men are so honest, so thoroughly square;
    Eternally noble, historic’ly fair;
    Who, when you win, will always give your back a pat.
    Well, why can’t a woman be like that?

    Why does ev’ryone do what the others do?
    Can’t a woman learn to use her head?
    Why do they do ev’rything their mothers do?
    Why don’t they grow up- well, like their father instead?
    Why can’t a woman take after a man?

    Men are so pleasant, so easy to please;
    Whenever you are with them, you’re always at ease.
    Would you be slighted if I didn’t speak for hours?
    (Of course not!)
    Would you be livid if I had a drink or two?
    (Nonsense.)
    Would you be wounded if I never sent you flowers?
    (Never.)
    Well, why can’t a woman be like you?

    One man in a million may shout a bit.
    Now and then there’s one with slight defects;
    One, perhaps, whose truthfulness you doubt a bit.
    But by and large we are a marvelous sex!

    Why can’t a woman take after like a man?
    Cause men are so friendly, good natured and kind.
    A better companion you never will find.
    If I were hours late for dinner, would you bellow?
    (Of course not!)
    If I forgot your silly birthday, would you fuss?
    (Nonsense.)
    Would you complain if I took out another fellow?
    (Never.)
    Well, why can’t a woman be like us?
    Mrs. Pearce, you’re a woman…

    Why can’t a woman be more like a man?
    Men are so decent, such regular chaps.
    Ready to help you through any mishaps.
    Ready to buck you up whenever you are glum.
    Why can’t a woman be a chum?

    Why is thinking something women never do?
    Why is logic never even tried?
    Straight’ning up their hair is all they ever do.
    Why don’t they straighten up the mess that’s inside?
    Why can’t a woman behave like a man?

    If I was a woman who’d been to a ball,
    Been hailed as a princess by one and by all;
    Would I start weeping like a bathtub overflowing?
    And carry on as if my home were in a tree?
    Would I run off and never tell me where I’m going?
    Why can’t a woman be like me?

    mobile | 8:23 pm on the 28th of April, 2007

  16. Tedious power struggles and name calling between bourgeois white men and women.

    chris lee | 12:52 pm on the 29th of April, 2007

  17. “You don’t attract dames with stories about how you love peace and quiet and a good book. You attract them by being a question mark.”

    Right on. I’ve been burned by “crazy” women too, but for every crazy woman there’s an insecure man letting himself be pushed around. Total self assurance is what you need, not a neurotic rant. If I were you I would take this ad down today and then rent “The Tao of Steve.”

    Nick Baker | 8:42 pm on the 29th of April, 2007

  18. I think that you should date the gay guy, Todd. At least you could do coffee.

    Brain | 11:02 pm on the 29th of April, 2007

  19. Human survival is a team effort. The projection of the new generation into the future demands the responsible dispatch of duty and role playing. In an ostensibly “enlightened” society such as ours roles have to be assumed willingly and negotiated appropriately.

    chris lee | 7:36 am on the 30th of April, 2007

  20. Sean, I got you a gift.

    It’s a clump of blank space. You can partition it as necessary and use it to separate your words into a series of coherent thoughts.

    disconnect | 10:38 am on the 30th of April, 2007

  21. Nick Baker, please don’t think you’re an authority on what women want. We DO want to know what a man stands for. I was pointing out some of Todd’s hypocricies, but the fact that he actually knows who he is, is at least a start. Plus, he’s intelligent and doesn’t seem into the nonsense that superficial guys are into. The “Tao of Steve” also taught guys how NOT to behave. I would take Todd over most of the men I’ve met, but that doesn’t necessarily say much.

    At least Todd’s personal is kind of funny. I doubt he expects to get 100 women out of it. He hopes to maybe get one he likes. So?

    I’d be more afraid of the Nick Bakers out there who say things like “women want a question mark.”

    Come to think of it, the good lot of you men need to just be yourselves and not take advice from seduction books and movies.

    Giana v. | 11:55 am on the 30th of April, 2007

  22. my apologies. nick was quoting someone else on the question mark. still, my advice remains: don’t take bad advice from other guys on ‘what women want.’ please do yourselves a favor!~!

    Giana v. | 11:57 am on the 30th of April, 2007

  23. LMAO, disconnect, that’s funny. He’s right about one thing though. I can’t imagine the emptiness of a life without children. Particularly when they become adults.

    Casca | 12:11 pm on the 30th of April, 2007

  24. “Girls do cry more than boys do. Sometimes they have trouble explaining why.

    thank you, gianna. there are lots of reasons but boys want everything to be perfect and they don’t realize that girls just react differently. they want women who are secretly men. sorry, but we cry. deal with it.

    HorseJDel | 10:03 am on the 3rd of May, 2007

  25. […] My friend Todd Seavey is one of the most engaging, hilariousand socially-connected people I know. And he finally has a blog! This denunciation of feminism has gotten a lot of comments. I don’t agree with everything he says — and “feminism” is one of those fuzzy words that can mean a lot of different things to different people — but I wholeheartedly agree with his first point: 1. Making A Priori Moral Assertions About Thoroughly Empirical Questions […]

    the derek rose blog » Blog Archive » todd seavey on feminism | 12:52 am on the 4th of May, 2007

  26. Instead of debating this ad further at this time, you might want to check out my blog entry of 5/7/07, which ends with a brief description of my new girlfriend.

    Todd Seavey | 10:35 pm on the 7th of May, 2007

  27. […] With less than a week to go before our big Debate at Lolita Bar on the question “Is It More Painful to Get Dumped or to Do the Dumping?” (between Rev. Jen and Rules for Saying Goodbye author Katherine Taylor), it might be worth unveiling my girlfriend Koli’s reaction (written without any urging from me) to our differences and to my own mammoth, undiplomatic personal ad: […]

    ToddSeavey.com » Blog Archive » That Personal Ad and the 6/20 Break-Ups Debate | 11:08 am on the 15th of June, 2007

  28. it’s sick. you’re actually still concerned with IQ and degrees. as if it’s an indication of “smart”. it’s as superficial as insisting on shopping at bergdorf goodman’s.

    nicole | 10:17 am on the 16th of June, 2007

  29. […] Yet we are all, if we are not psychopaths, aware that some words might offend others. Even if no offense is intended, we generally try to avoid giving this offense. Airing our views publicly, in a protected forum, often makes us insensitive to the hurt feelings our speech may produce. My friend Todd Seavey has spoken on the subjects of feminism, child-raising, and dating provocatively online in a manner I would be shocked to see him speak in person-to-person. […]

    Michel.Evanchik.Net » Blog Archive » Good Political Correctness | 10:33 pm on the 18th of June, 2007

  30. It is shocking that anyone could find this personal ad “funny”. Todd comparesgirls who fail to return his calls to Hitler or to serial killers. He humiliates his ex-girlfriends on the internet. Most gentleman would never consider speaking ill of an ex to anyone - not Todd…he blasts them all. The next Todd wants to be “funny” - he should do it at his own expense.

    Jane | 2:05 pm on the 22nd of June, 2007

  31. Do you sometimes treat innocent others sadistically?

    Good thing Im married, I reached the Todd cut off pretty eary on in the post.

    Tibbie X | 10:30 am on the 16th of October, 2007

  32. I admit that excluding a cute punk singer may reveal a flaw in the filter system.

    Todd Seavey | 10:36 am on the 16th of October, 2007

  33. […] So, to begin with, who is Todd Seavey? (Other than the scary guy in the picture on the right.) Well, for starters, he collects wingnut welfare ($51,224) from the Scaife and Olin-funded American Council on Science and Health, which regularly advocates that trans-fats actually cure cancer and that Twinkies will make you thin. He has also posted the most embarrassing personal ad ever posted on the Intertubes, complete with a picture of himself when he was twenty-years younger. […]

    Sadly, No! » Win A Date With Todd Seavey | 12:18 pm on the 24th of December, 2007

  34. Todd, I think your mommy is your best match. No women deserves you except her. Do us a favor and have yourself neutered. Thanks, asswipe.

    Oh, did pantload promise you nooky if you’d write a good review of his screed?

    moondancer | 2:44 pm on the 24th of December, 2007

  35. ha ha ha. loser.

    A. Noney Moose | 3:04 pm on the 24th of December, 2007

  36. I have never yet met a divorced man who did not tell me his ex wife was crazy. And of course we all know women go insane at menopause.

    A. Nonney Moose | 3:26 pm on the 24th of December, 2007

  37. Hey Todd, the only common denominator in all your previous failed relationships is YOU. Maybe you should think about a little self-improvement instead of obsessing about all the qualities a woman must needs have in order to have the “privilege” of dating you. I can’t imagine what ANYONE would see in such a pedantic, condescending, person. And I’d bet your previous girlfriends would say the same…

    artemis crackfrog | 5:38 pm on the 24th of December, 2007

  38. Dood!!

    Your wrist must get a serious workout…

    Twisted_Colour | 7:07 pm on the 24th of December, 2007

  39. What’s the point of saying somebody’s cute, Todd?

    I mean you’ll never allow her to pass her cuteness down to someone else. It’s the natural reaction and the reason for mating. The biological reason.

    Commenting on the beauty of another is irrational, because the reason for levels of attractiveness is to better acquire mates to pass down genes, and since you show no interest in having children and have made special arrangements to keep you from having children, any level of attractiveness in any mate is immaterial.

    Even worse a stable relationship with a woman that produces no children goes south mighty quickly, as she loses her looks and you lose interest. With familial links not present to cement a more complete relationship, the probability for separation due to the husband “trading up” to somebody younger and probably more “rational” increases, which ends in pain and hardship for your former mate. While you may be looking for a rational person, it stands to reason that the rational decision is probably not you.

    Case in point, just buy a prostitute, dude. She’ll agree with everything you say and won’t argue. She’ll always be as beautiful as you can afford, and she’ll follow any rules you set. The Free Market claims another victory.

    Jeff | 1:37 am on the 25th of December, 2007

  40. I am glad to hear you’re sterile.

    Roland | 2:15 am on the 25th of December, 2007

  41. Why don’t you take your Wingnut Welfare and hire a hooker?

    merlallen | 5:50 am on the 25th of December, 2007

  42. Hi
    Todd. Todd found a girlfriend. I am sooo proud of you!
    And happy that you have joined us in the formerly gay community! Way to go TODD. Todd. Todd!!! Oh God Todd!
    lol

    JB | 1:56 pm on the 25th of December, 2007

  43. I am sorry to see ACSH, its claims, and my position there misrepresented by the disturbing leftist site “Sadly, No!”, which presumably generated a few of the comments above (and on my 12/23/07 blog entry about Jonah Goldberg’s book). I say disturbing because I hadn’t realized hate-fueled leftists — of the sort who think, y’know, calling Cheney a “Dick” constitutes a really clever double entendre when in fact it doesn’t even quite qualify as a pun — think their venom is not only _rational_ but, apparently, _funny_.

    And while we know political opinions vary radically, the laws of comedy only bend just so far, people. Hate if you must, but no more unfunny insults, please. I refrain from deleting these Responses as a courtesy to posterity and public discourse, you know, so act like a guest in someone else’s house, fer chrissakes.

    Todd Seavey | 4:02 am on the 26th of December, 2007

  44. […] This week, hundreds of millions celebrated the birth of “the Prince of Peace,” while dozens vented their half-witted hatred against me on a leftist “comedy” site and in Responses to my obsolete Personal Ad and to my review of Jonah Goldberg’s new book (in which Fight Club was mentioned, as it happens).  Why do they hate us?  Essentially because I noted that Mussolini was a socialist rather than a conservative — which, coincidentally, was one of the main points of a prior talk by Malice (who has also regaled Lolita Bar audiences with stories of his “urban exploration” experiences and of having his life story turned into a comic book by Harvey Pekar). […]

    ToddSeavey.com » Blog Archive » DEBATE AT LOLITA BAR: Michael Malice, Ultimate Fighting champ Matt Hughes’ co-author, on “What I Learned in Hillsboro” | 1:41 pm on the 26th of December, 2007

  45. I don’t hate you. It’s more like contempt I feel.

    A. Nonney Moose | 2:56 pm on the 26th of December, 2007

  46. Todd, do you have any faults? (and I don’t mean the type that you reveal on job interviews, like “I work too hard” or “I’m impatient with people who are lazy.”) What are those characteristics that you have that a potential partner might find irritating or problematic, that you have realized exist, and have not yet been able to overcome?

    Sarah | 4:10 pm on the 26th of December, 2007

  47. Way to take the high road there, Moose (moose on the high road, everyone — be careful). Behold the SadlyNo discussion style, ladies and gentlemen.

    Everyone has faults, Sarah, and you can read about some of my growth over the years by clicking on the “Retro-Journal” category in the right margin (and doing so over the coming thirty weeks as well). Luckily, the broad consensus (no pun intended) of my exes has been that I’m very flexible and accommodating, and we have tended to be separated more often by big, irreconcilable differences or “external” forces like geography than by little annoyances.

    Todd Seavey | 12:26 am on the 27th of December, 2007

  48. And what exactly are you offering in return, Todd?

    Hmmm?

    shaker o salt | 8:29 pm on the 27th of December, 2007

  49. […] Random Rambo: Rambo body count inflation and Rambo vs. Rimbaud. […]

    Random link goodness at Punditry by the Pint | 2:41 am on the 23rd of January, 2008

Leave a Reply