Via BoingBoing and Wired.com (click here for full backstory): a deeply creepy, Triplets-of-Belleville-in-hell 1970s U.S. Navy sex-educational video, slash, “great holiday gift for your sexually reckless and technologically backward friends.”

PSA: Meanwhile, back in non-retro-non-irony-world, syphilis is not just for our boys in ‘Nam. In fact, it’s on the rise. Get yourself tested.

Via @Naunihal: Oldly-wed couples, counter-intuitively enough, might tank at The Newlywed Game. As Wired reports, a new study from the University of Basel has found that “couples married for an average of 40 years know less about one another’s food, movie and kitchen-design preferences [?!] than do partners who have been married or in committed relationships for a year or two.” (Dramatically, when data for these preferences were combined, all couples agreed  that “Julie and Julia” worked better as a book. — BG)

This pattern was observed among 38 couples aged 19 to 32, versus 20 couples aged 62 to 78. The greatest knowledge gap was in predicting food preferences, which just seems weird. The researchers’ hypotheses?

— Older couples pay less attention to such specifics, figuring eh, what’s left to learn?

— Older couples, rightly or wrongly, perceive more similarity between themselves.

— Older couples come from a generation in which men and women generally knew less about each other to begin with (Cf. Don Draper and Megan, not that they’ll last long enough to qualify as “older”)

— Older couples may be more likely to use “white lies” to keep things running smoothly. (“Seriously, your beets are my FAVORITE”)

And yet! Even though they knew less about their partners in certain areas, long-term couples reported more satisfaction with their relationships. So even if we start to space on the little-ish things we like (“I could have sworn you’d prefer Ikea”), it’s the like-like we share that pulls us through.

Via Wired: Maybe you and your nerdnificant other really are on the same wavelength!

What a rollercoaster of emotions we’re feeling at BG today. We found this blog entry via Wired from OK Cupid, noting a bias in their dating pool against women of a certain age (“a certain age” being a year or two older than you are, but whatever).

The good: It’s a veritable candy store of charts, graphs, a javascript widget (ooh! shiny!), and the like. Plus, the blogger, Christian, makes his case enthusiastically, circling the ages 30-45 and labeling it the “Zone of Greatness.” Plus, he’s done extensive research (statistical research, you naughty-minded harlots) to support the thesis that older women are more sexually willing, open-minded, and hotsy totsy. Sure, in an ideal world he’d be all “and they have the most beautiful minds!” but given that we’re talking about a dating site, we have to assume a certain meat-market mentality. And how!

Plus, that’s only part of his picture. And with phrases like this:

There are two operative stereotypes of older single women: the sad-sack (à la Bridget Jones) and the “cougar” (à la Samantha from Sex In The City) and both, like all stereotypes, are reductionist and stupid and I’ve tried to avoid them. I hesitated beginning my case for older women with something about their sexuality, like I did in Exhibit A, because that territory borders right on cougar country. But the evidence there was too compelling to ignore.

Christian reveals himself to be a FOBG in a BW (big way). We luuurve him.

Plus, the comments section speaks well of OK Cupid users.

So why the roller coaster? The original premise. Like the one bad review in a sea of raves, we keep mulling it over and wondering if all the blog posts in the world will knock any sense into unwilling minds. What do you think?

Girls and horses: match made in hog heaven. All my early fantasies of happiness and adventure featured my strong and loyal steed. We’d gallop across fields, along beaches, or my horse-friend would appear in the schoolyard at recess (you know, because horses always remember the way back), his coat shining like armor, his communications quiet, subtle — intriguing but ultimately knowable. A wild thing whose trust could be won through love and patience.

Hmm, it’s aaaall making sense now.

Which is why Wired columnist Regina Lynn’s latest inspiration — a horse camp for broken-hearted women — is pure, thoroughbred genius.

“We’d provide horses and Parelli Natural Horsemanship foundational instruction for the women to build relationships with those horses. (PNH is perfect because you learn so much about love, communication, relationship give and take, responsibility — and not just as it pertains to horses. Wimmens dig it),” she writes. All that in a supportive environment where women can “discover, or rediscover, their sexuality, their pleasure, their power.”

Somebody give her some seed money! Because sometimes it takes a heckofa lot more than sad country songs to get over a breakup.

Being apart from your honey stings like a bee-atch, and, as Jackie recently reported here, the cost of fuel is making it harder to keep things sweet. Long-distance couples have plenty of keyboardy, computery ways to keep in touch — e-mail, IM, Skype — but those tools can be too task-oriented and disruptive. Over at Wired magazine, Regina Lynn recently explored the budding field of “tele-amore” — a whole new world of technology that may help “intimacy, playfulness and common experiences.” As Lynn writes: “Despite the frenzy around social media applications, we still don’t have sensual devices that extend that functionality beyond virtual space.” The gizmos she describes are all about nonverbal communication (but we’re not talking about “teledildonics”). (more…)

It’s the clothes that make the man…brave enough to talk to a woman! Spotted on the blog at Wired.com: the CyranoSuit, which, as Wired describes it, “uses a series of sensors embedded in the arms and chest to detect physical interaction with a woman and then a hacked receipt printer delivers romantic lines [such as “I love your hair”] straight to the breast pocket of the shy would-be Lothario.”

Man, you know, if a nervous nerd made this much effort just to talk to me, I’d totally give him a shot. Sure, cutie, let’s hit Staples for another roll of paper, ’cause I could read you talking about me allllll night!

“Muffy is no longer in a relationship with Biff.” It’s the Facebook news feed from hell! On the one hand, it’s an easy way to tell all your friends. On the other, it’s an easy way to tell all your “friends.” And to get one million “What happened?!” messages that you really, really don’t feel like answering.

Wired magazine to the rescue! From this month’s issue: “Next time you split, in the ‘News Feed and Mini-Feed’ section of your profile settings, change ‘In a Relationship’ to the default ‘Select Status.’ But there’s a hitch [or not]: Your ex’s Mini-Feed will display an update in their relationship status, tipping off the gossip hounds…. You have no choice but to ask your former boo to delete it, ASAP.” Sigh. Remember when all it took to finalize a breakup was a really long and drawn-out and painful conversation?