The Finch Formerly Known As Gold

9 November 2005

Honey, I canceled your vote

Question from Sister Toldjah:

Would you let someone's political affiliations stop you from dating them?

I'd be more likely to go after someone who didn't use both singular and plural pronouns to refer to the same person (cf. "If you love somebody, set them free" — Sting), but I don't think that's a political consideration.

Actually, I think I'm close enough to the center to be incompatible with both left and right. The real difference will be in fervor: someone of an activist bent will likely despair of my general indifference to all the hate and injustice in this world/all those damn Marxists running around loose [choose one].

I think, though, that for a long-term relationship, it's better if the couple is somewhere within the same chapter, if not necessarily on the same page.

Posted at 6:24 AM to Table for One


I prefer dating Republicans, they pay for dinner.

Posted by: Donna at 7:41 AM on 9 November 2005

See my answer at the end of the comments thread here.

Posted by: Tatyana at 9:34 AM on 9 November 2005

I have taken the liberty of copying Tatyana's explanation over here, though you really should read it in context where she posted it originally.

— I'm too tired of filtering Care2Care and KillBush mail into the Junk folders to have more of the same for my post-coital conversations.

— I like my men to display their "hunter" qualities: to fish, fire a gun or employ winning logic.

— I already have a son to mother. Anybody else shouldn't expect me to be the nanny.

All of which disqualifies liberals completely.

Besides, as she says, that post is "vividly descriptive".

Posted by: CGHill at 10:02 AM on 9 November 2005

I'm glad you found it interesting, C.

Posted by: Tatyana at 11:34 AM on 9 November 2005

See, and here I thought the usage of the "singular they" was a political statement. The moonbats are even doing it to the Bible.

See Psalm 1, which used to begin "Blessed be the man..." (or "Beatus vir"). Now it starts out "Happy those...," just to avoid saying "man," or "he."

The footnote for that verse says "literally, 'the man.' That word is used here and in many of the Psalms as typical, and therefore is translated 'they.'" I must not know what 'translate' means.

It only takes two more verses to get extra ridiculous: Psalm 1 verse 3 now reads: "They are like a tree planted near streams of water..." So now "they" are like "a tree." I think the Author should get a new editor.

Posted by: Sean Gleeson at 12:47 PM on 9 November 2005