Online Dating Addictions: Do we need to start Online Daters Anonymous?
BlueEyes1962 09 Jun 2008 | : He/She Said That?
A friend wrote:
BlueEyes:
Since the pgh internet dating site is your blog, I was wondering if you might start a thread on whether online dating is addictive. I truly think I may have a problem – do we need to start Online Daters Anonymous?
My friends are convinced I do. Seriously, I don’t know if other people are using it like I am as a bandaid for wounded self esteem. Maybe it’d be interesting to find out.
I think it can be addictive – there is always the promise of something better out there, and the thrill and excitement of meeting new people. Fantasies can be so much better than reality. My apologies to Ben Franklin but two in the bush can seem to be better than one in the hand – or at least more exciting. (Guys – get your minds out of the gutter on that quote)
NOTE (June 10, 2008):
Seems I was wrong about Ben Franklin – the phrase predates him by many years.
This is from http://www.answers.com/topic/bird-in-the-hand:
It is better to accept or be content with what one has than to try to get more and risk losing everything. Cf. 13th-cent. L. plus valet in manibus avis unica quam dupla silvis, one bird in the hands is worth more than two in the woods. Parodied by the American actress Mae West (1892-1980) in the 1934 movie Belle of the Nineties: ‘A man in the house is worth two in the street.’
It is more sekyr [certain] a byrd in your fest, Than to haue three in the sky a-boue.
[c 1450 J. Capgrave Life of St. Katharine (EETS) ii. iii.]
Betyr ys a byrd in the hond than tweye in the wode.
[c 1470 Harley MS 3362 f.4]
You haue spoken reasonably, but yet as they say, One Birde in the hande, is worth two in the bush.
[1581 N. Woodes Conflict of Conscience iv. i.]
That Proverb, A Bird in the hand is worth two in the Bush, is of more Authority with them, then are all?testimonies of the good of the world to come.
[1678 Bunyan Pilgrim's Progress i. 42]