on the subject of dating in the twenty-first century, some have argued that only one boundary remains: dating significantly above or below one's rank in looks.

right before i left DC two years ago, there was a morning when the (now-ex)boyfriend and i were walking up P street in dupont. when we kindly declined a homeless woman spare change, she hollered after him: "you better hold onto that girl at your side. she is way too good looking to be with a scrub like you."

(at the time, i think we both pretended not to hear her.)

today, as we struggle with politically charged issues from affirmative action to immigration and discrimination towards cultures and religions, the twenty-something generation may be the first to grow up without the dispositive feelings about the prejudiced relations of our predecessors. forty-one years ago today, the supreme court struck down a virginia law preventing marriage between african americans and whites.

certainly, residue of a discomfort remains with the notion of mixed-dating (for example, a friend i once talked out of going to rabbinical school dating a non-jewish chick -- for one reason or another -- admittedly, hasn't been sitting right with me). however, i don't think that nontraditional marriages are the pervasive deal breaker and familial divider that they once were. dude, even the japanese woman was even allowed to marry the white patient in season 1 of nip/tuck.

as i consider my generational peers, it feels like the boundaries and deal breakers for dating and marriage are more undefined than they have ever been before. surely, even in modernity, attitudes toward interfaith, interracial, inter-age and same sex dating are a pertinent topic for many identities, probably because they are seen as a threat to group solidarity. but so are opinions on pubic hair grooming and dark nail polish during summer months.

in short, the disapproval of barriers in age-discrepancy, interfaith, interracial, same-sex, cross-cultural, and even michigan-osu are far less controversial than they once were. (save the latter, perhaps.) in fact, tina, one of my closest friends from law school and asian slave (here, tina, mix this bowl of cookie dough), is vocal on her preference to "marry white" to ensure her children's good looks. never mind the fact that she, herself, is gorgeous.

after my last anti-climatic breakup, i spent some much needed time exploring these hypotheses on diversity -- in depth, if you will. my therapist called it inappropriate sexual impulsivity; i called it the "celebrate-diversity-hook-up-tour." and here's what i have to report: profession, relationship status (don't ask), penis size and time-to-unhook-bra all have zero correlations to skill level in bed. and it's true: we all look the same in the dark.

this morning as i was riding the metro to work, i noticed a couple completely going at it. people on the train were glaring. looking around at fellow riders dressed in stuffy suits and ties, skirts and button down shirts, i sensed a feeling of disapproval towards this public display of affection ... between an interracial couple.

i was outraged. annoyed. ready to blog. after all, DC is a notoriously liberal city with relatively tolerant perspectives towards these kinds of things. i was annoyed that this couple was being viewed as an object of derision by individuals who were unwilling to accept that interracial relationships are evidence of a world full of diversity that is finally beginning to live in acceptance.

and then i got hostile too when i realized the likely reason behind the collective disapproving sentiments.

it's just not fair.

how come i never get felt up on public transportation during morning rush hour?

in the end, i haven't quite figured out what it means for me. other than i require someone who can:

(a) make me laugh
(b) put up with my mood swings
(c) allow me to be independent
(d) get me to orgasm
(e) all of the above.

(groping on public transportation is preferred; not required.)