< PREVIOUS LETTER   ||   NEXT LETTER >
 

Dear Breakup Girl,

What is the deal with "The Rules?" Why do you not like/advocate them? Please don't take me for someone affiliated with them trying to force you into admitting X, but I'm really curious! I've been to the Web page, and I don't know, some of their stuff makes sense (in theory -- of course, communism worked in theory too, no?).

The reason I'm asking is that I'm 18-years-old and have had several disastrous relationships. I'm insecure yet very forward (don't ask how that works -- very complicated and very silly). So, because I value your opinion so highly, I'm asking you to tell me what's wrong with the Rules, so that I can be comfortable knowing that I will find a guy who loves me for being loud and direct and honest (and a girl who will call a guy, rather than waiting for him to call me -- uh, her) ... so I don't have to change. Right now, I'm feeling so pathetic about my love life (or lack thereof) that I'm actually considering a change in who/what I am -- how sad is that?! Please help...

-- Curious About The Rules

Dear Curious About the Rules,

Ah, The Rules: Time-Tested Secrets for Capturing the Heart of Mr. Right. You guys know, they're all those hard-and-fast rules for playing hard-to-get that "guarantee" a ring (or at least purchase of The Rules II). Glad you asked, especially because my position on them is actually much more measured than one* might imagine (and that's not just because I'm playing it cool on our first letter).

Really, the most interesting thing about the Rules is not the pro/con debate, but rather the fact that that book -- nay, that movement -- was so damned popular. Debate all you want, but that stuff sold. Why? Because, at a time when the politics of dating seem to be one huge quicksandy gray area, people grope for a black-and-white bar that they can grab onto for dear (love) life. "The Rules takes the guesswork out of dating," comments a supporter in The Rules II. Exactly.

Anyway. Yeah, Curious. Of course "some of their stuff makes sense." Common sense. Like, don't hurl yourself at someone, repeatedly, if they show no interest. Why not? Not -- I say -- because it's "unladylike," but because, yeah, it can be tacky, and also self-defeating. Demoralizing. At a certain point, the chase becomes a chill. No one wants that, but lots of people need to be reminded that they don't.

Also, The Rules say, have a life. A life complete without boyfriend ("... as best means of obtaining boyfriend," to paraphrase Bridget Jones). Can't argue with that. But the whole point, The Rules say, is to be busy and fulfilled so that you're not focused on men -- and the way you do that is by reading The Rules, keeping The Rules Journal, attending Rules Support Groups, using Rules notecards/calendars/lipstick (made none of that up), etc. But don't think about men! Hmm.

Along the same lines, here's an actual quote from The Rules II: "When you feel that nothing is happening in the man area, take advantage of this downtime
and pursue that MBA or law degree, finish the novel you started writing in college, redecorate or find a hobby." Oh! With all this time I spent calling men, I could have gone to graduate school!?

(And how about this one, from the second -- more evil -- half of the first book: "When you do The Rules, you don't have to worry about being
battered." I'm speechless.)

Now. Technically, you can't do "some of their stuff" and still do The Rules per se. As the authors write, "You can't do The Rules a la carte." That wouldn't be The Rules. They're right. By definition, and also by dint of the publishing/marketing genius who knew that only absolutes -- like not, say, The Suggestions -- would take hold and cause such a stir. I'd like to marry that smartypants. I mean, in a way.

That said, BG does say, Rules or no Rules, that there is room for courtship (old-fashioned, even) without mind games, for measuring your responses
without egg-timing your phone calls (see Rule no. 6). For not chasing, because — well really, who has time? It's not playing hard to get; it's
being hard to get. It's not being a doormat, it's being a diva. Heck, if you want, call it a Rules Grrrl.

Where do you fit in? Sure, The Rules would tell you not to be loud and forward (they'd also tell you not to have short hair and not to be "funny," but I'll quit swiping). So you are breaking The Rules, but are you breaking your own? That's where to look. If you want to reinvent yourself somehow, that doesn't mean you need a day-vaca at some sort of Stepford spa. Rather, consider: at this time and stage in your life, is that (overcompensating for insecurity?) approach working for you? Maybe, maybe not. Maybe, just maybe, you would find it more fun (key word!) to hang back a little, to let the anticipation grow, to let the fizz fizz rather than shaking things up so fast they go flat. Try it. It doesn't preclude being loud and direct and honest as a person. See what happens.

In other words, make your own rules based on what you feel comfortable with. or simply based on a new approach you'd like to try for the
heck of it. Like: I'll give guys 15 minutes before talking to them; I won't e-mail them right back, whatever. If you stick to them, you'll
see if you like them. If you break them, you'll realize (a) Wow, bad rule! Don't like! (b) Wow, [something else instructive about myself!],
or (c) Wow, I actually like this guy -- unlike the others -- enough to break the rules for him!

All this -- after all that! -- is mere tinkering, though. Loud, direct, honest: if that's who you are, that's who you are. You can tweak your approach, if you like, without tweaking yourself. They'll show up; they will. Let your current frustration break your spirit, and you will break my heart.

Love,
Breakup Girl

* e.g. the husband of one of the authors, who, I am not kidding, stepped protectively between her and me when we met in the green room of a TV show we were doing together. How can I get me a guy like --? Oh, wait.

 
< PREVIOUS LETTER   ||   NEXT LETTER >