Podcast: Inside Modern Love

As a sex therapist and relationship counselor, (http://www.mytherapist.info/neworleans) It's nice to see that the things people talk about in session are getting brought up online and in other areas. These things are important ideas for people to discuss!

Out of all the Modern Love columns I have read, which to be honest aren't that many, the best nugget from all of them was in this Insider view of this column in the answer to the question "...what, after reading thousands of tales, have you learned about modern love?

I found Daniel's view to be the most insightful and succinct view of modern relationships in any short form opinion piece.

And this is coming from someone with 4+ decades of experience in relationships, a 20 year marriage, a most recent continuing 11 year relationship, preceded with extensive online dating and beginning with a normal 20 something single dating scene at the beginning.

To be kind and curious is the compass for any long lasting relationship.

"Q. Notice any trend in columns?"

i do. they definitely have a female and effeminate bias. however, i will not say anti-male bias--yet.

i know the column is called modern love, but maybe a good comparison would be a historical analysis called ancient love. in other words, how far has sexual intercourse--in the literal sense--come since the days of yore. a cross-country analysis would also be interesting: ex., modern love in traditional iran. it could be funny--or sad.

I find Modern Love columns to be rather hit-and-miss, particularly those written by too frequently appearing college-aged writers. College relationships aren't particularly deep or compelling, any more than high school relationships, but that's hardly surprising given the participants limited life experiences.

I also think that Modern Love over emphasizes that challenges, as opposed the huge benefits, of technology in finding and exploring love. I'll take the ambiguity of text messages or the overwhelming possibilities of potential partners on the Internet, over hoping someone interesting might randomly show up at a party.

The three attention-grabbing Modern Love columns that Daniel Jones mentions are indeed memorable. But my all-time favorite is Jenny Browne's essay from 2010, "We Should Dance While We a Still Can." Yes she's a writer, but her story of love and loss is about as real as it gets. Five years later, I still think of it whenever I hear "Brown Eyed Girl."

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2010/11/28/fashion/28Modern.html?referer=

The rule about real names does make sense.

But it has the effect of limiting these essays to a certain kind of experience, the kind that fits into a broader cultural narrative about romantic relationships, or at least gets along with that narrative.

Some of the most illuminating romantic experiences will never be seen here because they violate these norms. I have one about my competition for a lady's attentions with her former husband -- who was also a former man. Extramarital relationships, blameless or not, take place along a very wide gamut of emotions, can last many years, and with the tacit approval of all.

But naming names would destroy reputations, if not lives. Which brings up another unexamined, unintentional bias in this column. It often avoids the more unconventional experiences of people who do not live in big sophisticated cities. Modern Love stories take place in rural and conservative areas all of the time, but in these places you dare not publicize them.

The result is an impression that people in Flyover Country (culturally as well as physically) are living the lives of Ozzie and Harriet. One of the most unrestrained displays of public group sex I've ever seem was not at a Woodstock reboot or at Burning Man, but at a CountryJam. Don't think that one will make the Times.

I wish the column were more representative of all kinds of love. For example, I don't see anything that has to do with relationships with spouses who are disabled or chronically ill, a situation that is extremely common.

One thing I wish Susan Lehman had asked -

"What haven't you seen, which, if sent to you, would you be interested in?"

It would help all of us who have submitted to "Modern Love" through the years and been...turned down.

I commend Mr. Jones, however, as he always writes back with "We regret to say..."

I generally read the column, and often complain about two characteristics: First, as mentioned by others in these comments, that most published columns come from writers. To get more diversity, how about a moratorium on columns submitted by writers ?
Second, there seems a preponderance of columns written by younger contributors who lack experience and perspective. How many times do we need to hear from a lovelorn, urban 20 something that he or she repeatedly makes poor choices ?
Might one even speculate that the first and second issues are somehow correlated ?

I like the themes, but sometimes think a good editor (writer? contributor?) could craft a column, with the same or better impact, about half the length.

You're doing a great job. I love this column.

The first article I read was 'When an Open Relationship comes at a price" this June. I had shared it with my then girlfriend who was vehemently opposed to the idea. She hadn't liked it. The relationship ended recently and I subscribed to the New York Times soon after, been reading it ever since. Thank you for editing it... they mean quite a great deal to me now.

I like the Modern Love column and read it regularly. But it disappoints when addressing the love lives of college-age people. To read the column, you would think that they are exclusively consumed by social media and hooking up. The column confers a distinctly shallow sensibility on them.

In my experience, they are not so different from older people. I have a college-age son whose experience is much closer to what is reflected in the columns written by older people than the selections Modern Love provides from the young. Young people really aren't so different from the rest of us.

Yes! I love a Polish immigrant who has taught me even more than my second husband, who taught me at least half of what I knew. That's the joy of relationships.

I'd thought about writing. There were two personal stories of past love. They were about 15 years apart. True love never really end, but the pain for both lasted for about 5 years each. Daniel is right, the good stories came about after coming out of suffering and into enlightenment. Sharing one's stories during moments of torments is really self-therapy and cathartic. Sharing it in reflection, slowly simmered, gently reduced, during a state of enlightenment is about giving back, feeling generous and blessed to have experience it - at all, and to live to tell about it! It's a much deeper flavor for the latter. I was about to write, then love struck again. It's also about 15 years later. Seems like every 15-years pattern here. I think. I don't know. It's both sadness and happiness at the same time going into the middle age. It's like a Whiskey Sour. You don't know if the sourness of the lime juice makes the whiskey sweet, or the sweetness of the whiskey brings out the sourness of the lime juice. It's both. It's confusing. After a while, it doesn't matter. You just want another drink. Wanting is one thing, and abstaining makes love stronger, but the worse you could do is to hurt only two people. Getting totally drunk in it is another matter. You can bring down the whole village. It's intense and exhausting. Whatever it is, I hope for a smooth landing to be able to write about it. I have to do it before another 15 years come by again. This is my third strike. This is my debt.

I have been reading Modern Love for a really long time, since the beginning in fact. And for about 7/8 of that time, I have been hoping for a new illustrator. This faux-naif style of illustration is chugging into its third decade. Once a charming and quirky solution to the occasional editorial design problem, it has become ubiquitous in all kinds of design settings. It takes up a lot of room but it doesn't add or answer to the material it accompanies. If you're really attached to this style, hire the one person who brings meaning and ferocity to it: Lynda Barry.

Dan Jones should have mentioned that not only did Patty Dann meet the man who would become her second husband from a Modern Love column, she also wrote a wonderful second Modern Love about it. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/30/fashion/30love.html?pagewanted=all

I've enjoyed Modern Love over they years but was surprised that the same editor has been involved since the beginning. I've noticed a change in the past year as the articles went from thought-provoking to trite. I realize I'm getting older but it seems the protagonists are getting increasingly younger with much less to say. If anything, the comments are always enjoyable regardless.

Lately we've heard a lot from Millennials and their angst over today's so-called "hook-up culture." Can we please move beyond this topic and hear from other voices and perspectives?

these stories here always pick me up. thanks for giving me a moment to be in "love" through someone's eyes, to see possibilities when my days are tough and makes me laugh. my husband who considers himself a "no nonsense, practical man" even reads it! these stories connect all of us together and make us more tolerance of each other differences. thanks to those who shared them and good for them if they get a book deal out of it!

My spouse and I have been happily married for going on 33 years and have raised 3 beautiful daughters, but we always make a beeline for Modern Love every week. Its poignancy, humor and, yes, human wisdom, is always one of the highlights of our week. Even when we're slapping our foreheads and muttering, "You stupid guy/girl, you're making/you made a terrible mistake!" Long may it run.

I love you, Modern Love.

It seems to be written somewhere in tablets of stone that the vast majority of the “Modern Love” columns must be written by women. Why?

I think I must be over the hill. I just don't get any of this.....and don't want to!

While I enjoy the Modern Love essays I'm wondering why something like 9 out of 10 feature the author being drunk and doing something stupid. It's become a cliche at this point, almost a required throwaway. I find it juvenile and more than a bit over-sharing.

I am so happy that Lehman highlighted the importance of being curious about life and our partners. At My Therapist New York, www.mytherapist.info we encourage our couples to view their partners differences with curiosity. As Harville Hendrix explains, your partner has a different world view than you. Do not try to shut it down and force them to have the same views/opinions as you. Listen with curiosity and you might learn something new.

I love my dog, Tippy and Tippy loves me. I don't know if this is
"modern" or not.

Okay I'm old--and maybe this is one for the language column--but you people use the phrase "hook up" to mean the act itself? okay, I'm old and grossed out.

Thanks, Daniel, for your love story.

Thank you for this column. Lately I have taken to telling my friends, with a completely straight face, that I now write for The New York Times.

That produces the expected oohs and ahs, until I then add, "Of course they don't know that, and they are not paying me," and only then do I reveal my writing is appearing on the comments section. :-)

It makes for good fun, but here is the truth: the day I get something into Modern Love will be the day I can check something off my bucket list. It is truly one of the main reasons I subscribe, and my commenting? I am hoping it is honing my skills as a writer that, well, gets read in the New York Times.

I read the column religiously and usually enjoy it. What I don't enjoy is the feeling - spurred by the biographical blurb at the end that nearly always mentions an upcoming book or other product by the author - that makes me think the columns are solicited mainly from professional writers and serve as publicity for their other work. I'd like to hear more from regular people.

Disappointed that one issue was not raised: what, 99% of stories that make the column are those by writers -- aspiring or otherwise -- often been through some writing program or already published, more often already written their story as a first draft of a larger work, very often already blogging.

Is this a bias of the editor? Are their stories truly more compelling or because they package their story better? Would the editor consider working with an inexperienced writer with a good story in an extensive rewrite? The readership and the writership of the column are very self-selective, and the bias shows in the demographics (majority white, female, middle-class), any thing an editor can do to broaden the reach?

Put simply and succinctly, the writers to Dan Savage are not exactly represented in these columns, because their stories are not compelling or because they are not good writers or because they are not readers or because they are not what the column is after? Modern, but not that kind of love.

Some deep wisdom is on display, here. Thanks for all of the insights.
Who knows what is good or bad?
No one knows who their ideal mate will be before love arrives.
Open your mind and heart to all possibilities and realize that perfection is just an illusion based upon arbitrary standards.