There has been much discussion as of late, or rather I have just really noticed a string of connecting stories in the blogosphere (that's how it's spelled, right?) surrounding what is apparently a mythical creature. A unicorn in fact. What is a unicorn? Well, apparently according to those who have written and/or discussed the topic, is nothing more than a man, who is single, employed, and slightly taller than a woman, in the dating pool. Oh, and heterosexual. Can't forget that part. These are apparently the basic criteria.
So let's examine this for a bit, shall we?
For one, there has to be, and obviously is, more criteria that creates such a mythical creature. Hell, I am slightly taller than a lot of women (even when they are in heels), employed, heterosexual, and single. Now granted, I removed myself from the dating pool because I needed a break, but it wasn't like I had a harem of women banging down my door when I was an actively swimming in that pool. So, I fit the basic criteria. Am I a unicorn? But if I throw in the fact that I am divorced, overweight and have introverted tendencies, does that make me less of a unicorn? But what if I can cook and own my own home? Does that make me more of a unicorn?
Which begs another question. Are all unicorns created equal or not? Is a single, 6'3, dark haired, light eyed, single, never married, doctor, who volunteers with sick children and sings in the church choir more of a unicorn than a 5'11, blond but with a slightly receding hair line, light eyed, divorced, highly successful CEO of an Internet start-up, who could stand to lose a few pounds, with vacation homes in Paris and the Bahamas? And if all unicorns are not created equal, is there a point system? Is there a way to move up and down the point scale? Does it come with a handbook? Are there charts? There had better be some fucking charts!
But let's be honest for a minute. The concept of unicorn itself is a myth. Why? Because initial attraction boils down to looks. Human beings are superficial in that respect. I mean, a guy could make a woman laugh like he is a comedian, have romance down like he is Casanova, be tall, employed, single, and straight, but if he looks like he was set on fire and put out with a bag of quarters, he's fucked, and I don't mean literally.
And it works both ways. A girl could laugh at dick and fart jokes, drink beer, be fun to be around, and could suck the chrome off a bumper, but if she looks like a gargoyle, yeah, well, guys will pass.
Unless you are taking one for the team, and in that case, you will just drink more.
But if women get to make up some type of list of basic qualifications, should guys be able to make up a list of basic qualifications? What shall we name this mythical creature of basic qualifications? What will comprise the list of basic qualifications? I think Dave Chappelle probably has the most honest list there is, so I will basically stick to his. A guy just wants a girl that will suck his dick, play with his balls, make him a sandwich, and not talk so much. We shall call her a mermaid.
Why a mermaid? Because the odds of mermaids actually existing are about slim to shit, just like a fucking unicorn.