by Rudy Cheeks

Dear Dr. Lovemonkey,

I have been reading and enjoying your column for some time now. Your digs at the writing styles of those who ask you questions are getting increasingly annoying, though. We are not impressed by your prefacing of your many answers with "I print the e-mail verbatim for a reason . . . " No shit, some people are bad (even terrible) writers.

If you want the letter more acceptable grammatically, edit it and answer the question. I'm not trying to be annoying here, just conveying a message of tolerance. Hopefully, someday you will answer one of my questions. Thanks for your time.

Greg

Dear Greg,

You have a valid point, and Dr. Lovemonkey will, in the future, try to avoid the temptation of using this device in my ongoing crusade to promote functional literacy. Chiding people in order to encourage them to write more coherently is insensitive, and I do apologize for that.

The fact that the writers of letters published here are identified merely by a first name or a nom de plume should effectively shield them from any public humiliation. Still, my responses may have been the cause of some private discomfort, and I must say that I have given quite a bit of thought to whether the public good outweighs the private hurt.

Having been a performer for many years, I have found that the humiliation of "dying" in front of an audience often hastens the rate of improvement for the next performance. My great hope is that people will be encouraged (even if by fear of chastisement) to pay closer attention to their writing, which will improve as a result. And I do believe that if this column compels some people to write more carefully, that would be, as Martha Stewart would say, "a good thing."

I must confess that I do feel a great deal of ambivalence about messages of tolerance in areas in which there are clear standards. Language can be pretty flexible, but there are some basic rules to writing, and I don't necessarily find being tolerant of functional illiteracy a virtue. I would like to be more active in encouraging better writing, but pointing out bad examples may not not an effective method. I shall take your advice, Greg, but not as a message of tolerance.

Dear Dr. Lovemonkey,

I seem to have created quite a mess for myself. You see, for about a year I dated a man who, although totally unlike me, I felt comfortable around and who was Genuinely a Nice Guy. After a time, however, I decided that I needed someone more like myself, so I dated a guy who is practically the male version of me.

At first, I thought we were perfect for each other, but after about five or six months, I realized I was still in love with Guy #1. I am now back with Guy #1, but Guy #2 (who I would really like to keep as a friend, because we share a lot of obscure interests) keeps asking variations of the "Is there still a chance for us?" question.

Well, I can only think of so many creatively tactful ways of saying "no" before completely exhausting all of my synapses. The larger problem is that there is still a part of me questioning my decision. (Would I really be better off with Guy #2?)

I am really very happy right now, except for the knowledge that I have really hurt Guy #2. Is there a way to keep my friendship with him without going mad?

Gretchen

Dear Gretchen,

First off, if you are indeed "very happy right now," stop torturing yourself looking back at Guy #2. You can drive yourself crazy trying to revisit decisions you've made. Maybe that's why you initially came up with the idea of dropping Guy #1, because of some vague notion that you "needed someone more like [yourself]" rather than any deep-seated unhappiness.

Sounds like you've tried very hard to be diplomatic in avoiding telling Guy #2 that, no, you don't believe there is "a chance for us." If he doesn't get the picture by now, I would suspect that he just doesn't want to face reality.

For your own peace of mind, you might need to get more blunt about the fact that you are perfectly happy with Guy #1. Even though he may want to slink off and avoid you for a while when it finally sinks in that you're happy, believe that, in the long run, you'll be able to retain your friendship with Guy #2. Also, stop driving yourself crazy about having hurt Guy #2. These things happen.

By the way, congratulations on not coming up with something like "I know, I'll fix him up with that Courtney Cox lookalike who just broke up with her boyfriend and has expressed suicidal tendencies" or "I'll convince him that he's gay."

Such "solutions" only occur on sitcoms. And sitcoms, of course, are unlike real life in that they only last a half-hour and whatever zany horror befalls the principal actors, all memory of it has been erased by the next week and the characters behave just as stupidly.

Dear Dr. Lovemonkey,

Would there be an appropriate word to use in polite society for my husband's private parts?

Eileen

Dear Eileen,

No, there would not, as Dr. Lovemonkey's concept of "polite society" (which is a strange term, indeed) would exclude people who are in the habit of discussing another person's genitalia. When speaking with medical personnel, the word "penis" is usually acceptable (as opposed to, say, one-eyed trouser snake).

By the way, Dr. Lovemonkey tends to use the word "unit" for the male organ and "area" for the female, but he has never confused those he's is speaking to with "polite society."

---

Email Dr. Lovemonkey

---

Dr. Lovemonkey's archive

---