If you're a successful, discreet, discerning, selectively single man, chances are you're finding it difficult to meet the right woman.
Minnesota generally ranks high on quality of life and all over the map on various business climate lists and state rankings. On perhaps the most vapid of these surveys, Minneapolis ranked near the bottom. In October, researchers asked of the 30 largest metro areas: "Would you want to live in this city or its surrounding metropolitan area or not want to live there?"
And guess what? Results largely sorted themselves out by geographical location and weather.
Yesterday, as I was flying home from the number-one city in that survey, I finished my book prematurely. As a result, I may have discovered yet another index on which my adopted city is a non-factor.
I'm just not sure of the reason.
Dipping into the in-flight magazine — its odes to the obvious in out-of-the way places interspersed with ads targeting people with too much disposable income — I found two full-page ads for services specializing in romantic contracts. (Although the search companies say they use executive recruiting techniques, I suppose it would be rude to call them booty hunters.)
Selective Search boasts offices in 23 cities where it trolls for high class babes and executive males who can't find them. Kelleher & Associates has only 17 offices, but it is "the only privately owned matchmaking firm with offices across the country and in Europe." (No, none of those offices are in Russia, Thailand or Liberia.)
And, you guessed it — no offices in Minneapolis, St. Paul or even Wayzata. What's worse, two other last-cities-on-earth, Detroit and Cleveland, do have offices.
Are we really the dregs of desirability? Or does it mean we have fewer inept men and desperate women?