 |
|
|
|
December 23rd, 2010
11:03 AM ET
The Sexpert: When sex gets staleAfter you’ve had sex with the same person at least a thousand times it’s easy to fall into a routine. For many of us, the most exciting part of a relationship is at the beginning, when we’re falling in love. It’s a time filled with newness and possibility, hot and heavy flirtation, and even hotter and heavier sex. But, after being with someone for a while, things can understandably get boring. You stop trying as hard. You’d sooner reach for that remote and a pint of Chunky Monkey than your partner. Quite simply, the thrill is gone. At Good in Bed we believe that when sex gets stale it’s time “take a walk on a shaky bridge.” In 1974, two well-known psychologists, Arthur Aron and Donald Dutton, set out to explore the mysterious nature of sexual attraction, using two bridges in Canada as the setting for an ingenious experiment. One of the bridges— On Day One, whenever an unaccompanied man ventured across the shaky bridge, he would find himself stopped midway by an attractive young woman. She would introduce herself as a psychology student and then proceed to ask if he would mind participating in a brief survey. On Day Two, the same woman followed an identical routine on the sturdy bridge. Sounds pretty straightforward, right? But there was a little twist: When each of the men completed the survey, the young woman would hand him her phone number and tell him that he was free to call her later that evening for the results. Unbeknownst to the subjects, the real study was not the answers the men gave on the survey, but what happened afterward. Which set of men would be more likely to give the woman a call? Would the excitement and exhilaration of being on the shaky bridge, versus the more mundane experience of being on the solid bridge, promote romantic attraction? Does adrenaline makes the heart grow fonder? Not only did Aron and Dutton find that the men on the shaky bridge were more likely than their stable-bridge counterparts to call the woman later for results of the survey, but they were also far more likely to ask her for a date! When it comes to desire and attraction, a little unpredictability goes a long way. It spikes the brain's natural amphetamines, dopamine and norepinephrine, which play a big role in sexual arousal. In technical terms, Aron and Dutton were testing a concept called “misattribution,” also known as excitation transfer theory. That’s the idea that lingering excitement from one situation—say, walking across a shaky bridge versus a stable one—can intensify a subsequent emotional state. Beneath our beds, there lies a shaky bridge, ready and waiting for high-stakes action. Yet most of us spend our sex-lives on the stable one, often without realizing it. Luckily, you don’t have to literally cross a shaky bridge, or go bungee-jumping, in order to shake things up, (unless of course you want to), but you do have to work as a couple to be creative and adventurous—both out of the bedroom and in. The brain is our biggest sex organ, so start with sharing a fantasy. Research shows that people with active fantasy lives are more sexually satisfied, more sexually responsive and more adventurous about sex in general. Remember, there's a difference between sharing a fantasy and actually acting one out, and lots of points along the way to enjoy. A little novelty goes a long way, and if you need some more ideas, check out my new book 52 Weeks of Amazing Sex, which includes lots of sexy scenarios and ideas to expand your horizons. Remember, it takes two. For every woman who’s willing to stand at the center of that shaky bridge, there needs to be a man who will meet her halfway. Ian Kerner is a sexuality counselor and New York Times best-selling author, blogs on Thursdays on The Chart. Read more from him at his website, GoodInBed.
Next entry »Shortage of medicines kills some US patients
« Previous entryGardasil approved for anal cancer
|
  About this blog
Get a behind-the-scenes look at the latest stories from CNN Chief Medical Correspondent, Dr. Sanjay Gupta, Senior Medical Correspondent Elizabeth Cohen and the CNN Medical Unit producers. They'll share news and views on health and medical trends - info that will help you take better care of yourself and the people you love.
 |
|
|
|
It might be also because the man on the shaky bridge..no matter how shy, will call because he knows that she will remember her if he mentioned the 'shaky bridge' or because it has some kind of conversational starter like "wow, was that bridge shaky and dangerously high..aren't they going to fix that thing..and why were you on such a dangerous bridge" as compare to a boring "remember me on the sturdy bridge?..ah what sturdy bridge?..all bridge should be sturdy duh". The shaky one is more adventurous and more things to talk about...thus..conversational icebreaker. So it's not a really good experiment.
Agreed as I was thinking the SAME thing! : )
I certainly hope my tax dollars funded this asinine "study." It proves absolutely nothing except that these hacks can jump to conclusions.
Also, if the person chooses the shakey bridge to get to a destination rather than finding a safer route, that person is probably a bit more adventurous to begin with. The odds are all types pass the sturdy bridge, but only the dare devils passed the shaky bridge and the people that like taking a risk are more likely to take a risk by asking a girl out.
Why do you need a conversation starter when she told you to call for the results? I back what nicole says, the men that took the shaky bridge are probably more adventurous to begin with.
"So it's not a really good experiment." By, I'll say. How did they know which men were single? How many of the ones asking fr a date were cheating? How many of them were gay and never called? I'd take whichever bridge was shorter or closer, but I love my wife and am not bored in the least, so I wouldn't have called. And how many of them thought "Psychology student? Sorry, it's not Date A Crazy Lady Week. Pass."
wimsy, I see you choosing the solid bridge.
Additionally, this study does not address the difference between the disposition of a man willing to cross a shakey bridge over dangerous water versus one willing to cross a safe on. Intuitively it would seem more likely that the former would be an extrovert.
I was thinking the same thing too...flawed study. The shaky bridge experience is more memorable which explains the results better than the risk in my opinion. Also the sample pool is predisposed to outgoing men.
It doesn't matter what the study determined, the author put it in there to segway selling his book at the end of the article. That's the real point of the article. IMO.
Wow guys, wow. Ok, just because the entire methodology wasn't spelled out in some Sanjay Gupta blog doesn't mean that you know better. Let me go ahead and fill in some of the details to this historic study. I'd suggest you go back and read the original article though, before you jump to conclusions about how this was conducted.
The participants were single males who had been recruited for this particular study. They were randomly assigned to the shaky bridge or solid bridge condition (and in another study, to number-on-the-bridge vs number-after-the-bridge condition, which turned out to produce more of a feeling of attraction because people would misattribute their anxiety over the bridge to the anxiety of attraction when they couldn't find an immediate cause for their anxiety. Random assignment, when a large enough group of people have been recruited, ensures that the groups are extremely similar in disposition and situation, so the only differences between the groups is the manipulation. This means that the men did NOT get to choose which bridge they went on – no study in psychology would be published if you let your participants choose their condition. Individual difference factors are also easily factored out using an ANCOVA analysis.
I find the conversational opener alternative hypothesis to be rather weak. A woman has handed you her number. Women don't hand out their numbers to tons of men every day, which means she's going to remember you regardless. "I'm the guy from the shaky bridge" is just as good of an opener as "I'm the guy from the bridge". Furthermore, this study has been replicated in a number of different situations, with different men, different women, and even using exercise machines and chemicals. It's an extremely robust finding that was actually monumental for psychology – it means that humans can believe one thing about their motivations, but in actuality, there is another cause for their actions.
In short, don't be so critical before you've done your homework.
Agreed
Whimsy, I hope it was funded with your tax dollars too; also, everyone else who whines about when their tax dollars are spent on things like this that help us understand human psychology.
To anyone with a curious mind, this stuff is interesting. To morons with no thirst for knowledge, I can see why it might seem like a waste of money.
well dont know much about shaky bridge , in terms of an individual and his or her relation , but when extrapolated to a nation as a whole , I guess we dont seem to have any problem even with the depression , we simply print more money .
So my guess is at individual level we should not try too hard or fall into or out of relation if its just the money or if the s is monotonous , we should learn that when geting into long term relation ,means LTR and does not mean u get bored after 10-15 yrs , after all that is why we are humans and we are different than dogs
Or... The men who took the "shaky" bridge were more daring to begin with and therefore more likely to call the girl... I'm just sayin...
Oh you're all psychology experts aren't you. Skeptical of everything that might be of interest to the point of making fun of it to cover you're own inadequate feelings. Don't be jealous–quit taking the stable bridge. Think the study stinks? Come up with your own.
I would strongly recommend obtaining a minimum of a masters degree in psychology before you arrogantly proclaim that a study has no merit. It does, in fact, have merit. People that are better educated and likely more intelligent than you came to perfectly reasonable conclusions supported by empirical evidence. Perhaps more thought and less impulsiveness is in order. One of the great dangers in this country is that most people don't know how little they actually know.
@Wimsy, I know my tax dollars didn't fund this study. The year they conducted it, I was being born.
While interesting, the bridge study is seriously flawed in its conclusion that the "excitement and exhilaration of being on the shaky bridge" was the driving factor in later asking for a date. It is highly likely that the bridge itself was a self selection mechanism for a certain type of man. It acted as a filter, eliminating those guys not confident enough to walk out there. The type of man that willingly crosses a foot shaky bridge is almost certainly more willing to call a girl he just met and ask her out, regardless of whether he met her on the bridge or on line at a coffee shop. It's not the bridge, but the guy. This bias is fairly obvious...I would hope that the author of the original study controlled for this in drawing his or her conclusion.
Nowhere does it say that the men had to option to "choose" one bridge or the other. They didn't. Therefore, you all didn't understand the study, which you might want to do before contradicting it.
If people actually read the article correctly you would see the experiment was as follows: On day 1 you could ONLY walk the shakey bridge and on day two the sturdy bridge was the ONLY option. The men were not choosing which bridge to cross. They did not have a choice depending on their particular day for the experiment. I think the study has a valid point which the author details.
Men men men men. This study does not focus on the women as well. This study is not double blind, therefore the interviewing women, by definition, had an effect on the outcome. Just knowing that she is "on the exciting bridge" means the interview would have acted and given her number much differently than the interviewer on the other bridge.
Also the study fails in any possible comparision. Giving a number to a guy and sleeping with a guy are two different things. Having a women give her number to every man that walks by and seeing if he calls her back, and having a women sleep with every man that walks by and seeing if he calls back is way different.
Also the study did not blood test each man to show the hormone levels of the men who called were indeed higher.
This study honestly makes me want to jump OFF a bridge........
Well, did we factor in the possibility (probablity?) that the men who take the shaky bridge route are more secure and adventurous by nature????? Seems obvious.
That's exactly what I was thinking...while I may agree with their theory, I don't think their experiment proved it...I think it proved something else entirely...that really didn't NEED to be proven. More adventurous men are more willing to take a risk.
Exactly. The men taking the shaky bridge are more likely to take chances, including asking someone out.
Where did it say that the male subjects had a choice?
You're right, Alex. The subject didn't have a choice of which bridge to take. Each was presented with one and only one bridge to cross and each knew nothing about another bridge.
good idea! will try and find out more. make love. not war.
I can't help but wondering what that 'attractive young woman' looked like, ha...
you must be walking on the shaky bridge lol...
I wondered if the survey designer thought she was really hot and set up the experiment just to validate her as attractive to a lot of men. "The experiment's valid because no one can resist Tiffany's charms," with a wink at her. Then HE asked her out. Psychology, y'know.
It may be that the ones on the shaky bridge were tying to avoid having to walk to the sturdy bridge, assuming the shaky bridge was more convenient. Hence this may signify laziness from shaky bridge crossers. And as for the first comment, meeting someone in the middle of a bridge for a survey is enough to talk about. I'm sure she wouldve remembered meeting someone on a bridge, shaky or not.
Interesting experiment
don't care what kind of bridge or anything..I just want to do it..who's up for it?
hmmm...i'm ready
are shaky bridges the new place to meet singles? i might be inclined to look into a season pass for that bridge! : )
Bridge or no bridge... bring me some strange
That might be the only kind you ever get, dawg.
yep – me too please!
It's all about getting somebody new.
The problem is that Men are very selfish creatures. The sparks eventually leaves both of you, but woman usually try and stick it out because of the love she feels for him and she tries to come up with ideas to push past the "stale" times. As for men, they go else where. The key men need to realize that when it's boring for him, it is way past boring for her as well. But if you don't want o lose your partner, then you both should be close enough to work as a team, and come up with ideas that can get you blood flowing again. Newness is nice in one aspect, but the best O's Ive ever had are with someone I truly love and am comfortable with. So you chose "butterflies" or the best multiple crazy volcano irruption O's!!!!!!
I second that!
Eruptions when refering to a volcano, not Irruptions.
Men go elsewhere because they can't get it at home.
Wow, such a bold stmt, to lump every single man into being a quitter loser who gets bored easily.
Someday your stereotyping will up and bite you when you spou lt your ignorant rants to the wrong person.
Is every woman psychotic and crazy??? I could sure say that, cause I've known quite a few. But that wouldn't be accurate or fair, because not every woman is. I married a wonderful woman. She has her quirks, and so do I. But she's pleasant, considerate and is stable.
It's women like you that cause simpler men to stereotype all women as conceited and cold.
Perhaps you should re-read the article, you seem to have missed the point. In particular the reference to meeting half way.
But what would *I* know? My wife and I have only been married for 29 years, next Monday.
We used to do it all night long.
Now, it takes all night to do it. 😉
You totally just contradicted yourself. Why would the s3x be stale to you as a woman if being with the same guy over and over led to the best O's of your life? For me personally it doesn't get better over time. It usually gets worse. So in the end committing to a single person for s3xual pleasure equates to essentially saying your s3xual pleasure is no longer of importance to you. I find that to be very very depressing. ( I apologize for the s3x, but the site automatically flags posts with that word)
There are lots of insecure women out there with unresolved passt that haunt them who bail out at the first sign of trouble. It's not just guys who move on. I think you need to look at each person individually instead of trying to generalize and stereotype by gender...
There's a lot of truth here. It usually takes time for a man to learn a woman's body, but once learned, taking her to that place is far easier. That is a benefit of a longer-lasting relationship. I think for a lot of couples, sx ceases to be such a priority once kids come along. That is a guess however, as I've never had kids, and never been a relationship longer than three years.
That is just crap. Woman try just as less and when they get bored they are the first ones to run off and cheat. Trust me I get hit on by bored married woman all the time and sometimes I even hate efff them just because they are pigs.
Dont you think that your statement is a little one-sided? I love the way women make themselves out as the ones that dont quit, stray, or try harder to keep the relationship running, total BS.
I love it when a subpar women who OBVIOUSLY doesn't know how to pick a good man, tries to give advice on what all men "should" do.
Go fix yourself. The man you choose is a big reflection on who you are.
You know Ian, if you're going to publish an article, the least you could do is be professional. That means RESEARCH and getting your facts correct. The Capilano Suspension Bridge is in North Vancouver, which is Metro Vancouver, which is only a few miles from the U.S. border on the west coast. That means that it is in the SOUTH of Canada, and not in Northern Canada. And only someone looking to sensationalize an article would call it 'shaky'. Articles like yours with misinformation are why most Canadians don't take seriously articles that are written by U.S. citizens about Canada.
Get over yourself, Gordon! the mistake about the bridges isn't the main point here...maybe you need to meet someone on a bridge or two!
Anyone could miss Canada. All tucked away down there.
Wait, where's Canada? Sorry Mr Inferiority Complex, couldn't help it.
oh shut up and get over yourself. i'm sure canadians make mistakes about US geography too. all my complaining European friends about America's lack of intelligence was quickly countered by asking THEM a few SMALL DETAILS about the USA. if you don't like american news, then don't read it. i'm sure Canadian news has PLENTY of articles about the exciting life of a Canadian.. eh?
Geeze, you got all worked up in a lather over an error in geography?
As a neighbor, you should be well aware that US citizens are horrible with geography.
Many think that Afghanistan is in the middle east and not asia.
Many can't even pick out Utah on a map.
And I'll be hanged if I can remember what province is what in Canada. But that's mostly because I really don't care, as I have no business in Canada. Too cold in the winter for these old bones...
Gordon, not that it matters but the bridge is shaky. Check it out. Maybe not as shaky as Lynn but it is still shaky. Secure yes but still shaky
I assume this article has been edited to take out the reference to "northern"...because I don't see any mention of the location of the bridges in this article, not that it matters to the subject at hand. Seems a little anal to get all flustered about the location of the bridge, when it's not pertinent to the subject matter. Please don't bash US Americans for such triviality.
Ooooh, you found a technical error that is only remotely relevant to the article. Congratu-fricking-lations.
Lil Mil, you are full of it. It's the woman that is at fault. Never wanting to try something new. Always the same 'ol same 'ol. No wonder men go looking in other places. Women are the "stale" ones.
Bruce, we only do the "same ol, same ol" because 15-20 minutes is nothing to get excited about.. Who's stale?
Ummmm, NO!! So far from the truth. It all depends on the person you are with. If you can't open up to your mate, then its safe to say u probaly shouldn't be together. If I can't express my fantasies to the man I am with or tell him how I liked being pleased, then what is the purpose? I think men have learned to be afraid to really be truthful about that kind a stuff and never grew out of being like a little teenage boy in hiding his real thoughts. I am not saying that woman havn't helped putting that fear in them, but yet in still, every1 is responsible for their own happiness. So if you are with sum1 u can't be honest with, then move on.
You're so right.
You have the key right in your own words. Communication. Telling each other what you like. Fantasies and favorite things.
I won't say that my wife and I wrote the Kama Sutra, but we most certainly DID add a couple of chapters to it over the years.
It's people like you that make relationships so difficult. Spouting nonsense about guidelines people should follow in a relationship. Guess what? No 2 relationships are exactly the same. No 2 men are exactly the same. No 2 women are exactly the same.
Men aren't the only ones to blame for bad relationships. You're the one that sounds rather selfish by trying to dictate what a good relationship is. That is just your own preference.
My girlfriend had quite a laugh reading your nonsense. Unlike you, she understands the fact that everyone is different.
I'm happy for you, but you really don't have much of an idea beyond your own experience. Imagine being married to someone who takes medication for anxiety and has lost all physical interest in intimacy. Or imagine being married to someone who has never felt comfortable talking about her response. Or imagine being married to someone who is still dealing with childhood trauma associated with intimacy. If you're going to take the time to post, don't make generalizations unless you have enough imagination to think beyond your own situation.
Why do you think prositution is so prevelant? Still convinced that men are just prewired to procreate. Frequency and variety fulfill that. These so called "experts" can tout their theories all they want. It just comes down to human nature. Not that a number of women don't do the same thing. However, given the statistics, I'd have to strongly argue that the man NEEDS the variety at a MUCH higher rate.
this still hasnt helped me get better in bed. Should have read something on FOX news about finding an affair...
Bruce, it always our fault. Get used to it.
hopefully there's anal involved.
Swinging helps keep things interesting. Its like dating as a couple.
I'm buying a hammock.....
I'd push the lady off the shaky bridge...hopefully some water to catch the fall, don't want the lady to get hurt, but I'm off to the other side to drink some beer, watch some football and enjoy the peace and quiet without the nagging. Sorry going through a divorce.
Sounds like something I'd do. Those are all the things i love to do. You just picked the wrong woman.
These articles need reviews by a good proofreader before posting. C'mon, CNN.
Reminds me of the killer rabbits from Montey Python's Holy Grail.
My first Lamborghini would be the happiest day of my life...after my third...it's just another day. No matter how hot someone may be in reality...human beings will always get bored of the same routine. That is why many go on vacation or exploring different places to get out of the rut and get stimulated. After enough stimulation, the person comes back home and realizes just how wonderful home sweet home is in reality. They appreciate the familiarity of their spouse/home even more and remember why they married them or chose to stay in that particular local instead of another place.
The difficulty lies in balancing the search for stimulation with marital fidelity...a fine balancing act which requires wisdom and understanding with both parties.
If I get any, it's strange. Women need to leave out the 54 pillows, 2 dogs, the kids, and the computer when it's time to "sleep". Her parents live with us and it's "My parents might hear us!" For Pete's sake, leave out the inhibitions. How did their kids get here, devine conception?
Thats a jacked up situation man, but your still there....I give you credit for that.
Not a good study. The men on the shaky bridge are already more daring and adventurous then the men who would cross the sturdy bridge. It irks me that good money goes to pay for these ridiculous studies that prove nothing and are helpful to no one.
Northern Canada? Capilano Suspension bridge is about as far south as you can get in Canada. Vancouver, BC.
Thank you for pointing this out. This has been corrected.
Regards,
Elizabeth Landau
CNN.com
I wonder if this is why crazy latin women are so much more fun to date than sedate caucasian women...
Hey how did u know I was latin??? Lol
I'm guessing it was your grammar skills. It might have been that you said it was selfish men's fault and then went on an on about I, I, I and your own irruptions with sum1.
Sooner or later they all end up on the sturdy bridge
ha, what do you mean a mere 1000 times. how about after a couple of times.
for me if there is no passion, i might as well be eaten vegitables.
so i chose to wait for the passions and have never married nor lived with any girlfiends.
and for me, most all encounters are very memorable. kind of like going out to a resturant once a year, then its a real treat and adventure when compared to going every week end or more.
heck, i once followed a girl to her hut in the jungles in south america only to meet her family in a one room grass hut on stilts. thier most prized possession was a battery powered record player. as they brought it out to play, i went outside to bath room and ran all the way back to camp for fear i would end up being dinner...... talk about a shaky bridge! ha!
I've been married for twenty eight years and although I love my wife very much I would rather watch a good hockey game than knock one off in the bedroom most of the time. Don't get me wrong, she's attractive and we still have a respectable love life but by the time we have time to be "romantic" we're both pretty well worn out from all the other commitments we share like work and endlessly running around. I think if a couple can still be happy to sit and relax together after thirty or so years of marriage, things are just fine.
Agree.
THANK YOU!!! Couldn't agree more, after 7 years and two young kids we are both plumb exhausted every night. We love each other, communicate constantly throughout the day and have a reasonable love life, we both want more sometimes, but we both like everything else in our lives to be just right and that reduces quite a bit of our energies. I think it has only gotten better over time as we have learned what we each like and are more comfortable with one another.
amayda,
I've been with my wife for ten years and if she thought like you I'd be scared to death. You have to find time and energy for intimacy. A busy life and children are not an excuse. A love life has to be more than reasonable. I can see the point Wallster is making after almost thirty years. But after a mere seven... things should still be pretty intimate in my opinion. And I would bet that your husband has a similar opinion.
there's always the dirty sanchez or the cleveland steamer
Being an Americn woman in total fascination with a Canadian man, I'd try anything he would like to do...as long as it is between the two of us.... He is so uninhibited, he encourages me to be the same...and bring ANY fantasy to the table.....This study? Not worth reading.
For every hot babe, there's a man who's tired of banging her.
TRUST ME, it goes both ways! LOL
No matter how long I've been with the one I love or how many times we've "done it", I still WANT to be intimate with my PARNTER. Its not about the "climax" or about what my partner can do for me. Its a matter of wanting to be intimate with your partner and not letting anything else get in the way of that...make it a priority. If you don't, then I think that your partner must not really be a priority to you. Also, intimacy doesn't always have to be physical.
This is rediculus study. Bridge has nothing to do with men calling or not. Most men will call the girl, specially if she was pretty. I don't know where these dumb piece of craps come up with their stupid ideas.
Two chicks at the same time. If you get bored of that, your dead below the waist and midaswell be gay.
Good luck getting any chick to agree to that.
Yeah, right.
i like bridge
I rolled over last night and told my love that I was getting ready to make her the happiest woman in the world. She said she would miss me. 😉
OMG. That is the funniest thing I've heard in weeks! LOL
Man, who is the dude in that pic? hot
are you gay?
So only men read this board? besides, he is hot
Thanks, Lily. I'm a girl. 🙂 They think only men read these boeards I guess. Besides, what if I were gay. What difference would it make?
He is hot, but it's just a stock photo. There's another one just like it where he has his eyes closed.
I thought he looked a little like Chris Pine.
I have been married for more than 16 years, we enjoy each other all the time. There is nothing I see in my man than can bore me. He is everything a woman can possibly want. No, he isn't perfect, but he sure is the man that God has ordained for my life and he feels the same about me.
good for you.....
Ofcourse it takes a Canadian to do this lol
Dudley Do-Me.
So a 'study' found that more adventurous men took a more hazardous route, and were more likely to take a risk and ask a girl out on a date? And the same 'study' found that more cautious men took a more safe/stable route, and were less likely to take a risk and call a girl they just met??
Wow, if this is what passes for Science, I will take Creationism any day!!
Did the study take into consideration the mind set of the two types of men involved:
1. The men who took the bridge that was constructed solely of plank and cable and swayed perilously in the wind some 250 feet above a turbulent river.
2. The men who took the bridge that was solidly built anchored bridge that sat a mere 10 feet above sea level.
I think the first category are adventurous and would like to have wild rides in relationships too.
The men were randomly assigned to either the shaky bridge or sturdy bridge condition, meaning that the personality of the man has no bearing on this study because the decision was made by the experimenter, who essentially flipped a coin to see which "bridge" the man would cross. It wasn't their choice, as it rarely is in psychology experiments.
OK...let's see. This is stuff we already knew, but the author threw in an example. Then proceeded to SELL HIS BOOK complete with a link to his website.
Dear CNN. PLEASE USE JOURNALISTS to write your material. Don't descend into the world of promotional blogging.
I couldn't even finish the article so boring, Yawn, eye lids closing, zzzzzzzzzzzz
You guys that are on here that make excuses for yourselves are ignorant to say the least. Please educate yourself, go to Barnes and Noble tonight and start reading some helpful books. You can probably improve by Christmas if you hurry... Just a little FYI!
If you don't want to learn anything to better yourself, then don't involve yourself in a discussion. It's not rocket science, it's pretty plain and simple actually.
Yep...then your wife has an affair and starts sending nude pictures of herself from her black berry to other men....geez
Joe shmo, really? Your an idiot..
Did the experiment control for the fact that only adventurous types would venture across the shaky bridge in the first place?