> Going the (long) distance

> How to beat jetlag

> Climate: tweak your life

> Yvonne's African welcome

> School boys swap lives

> Crisis hits Versace

> Transsexuals blessed

> For the love of the game

> Women can shun jihab

> LoveLife wins an award

Today, 21 November 2009

› SACP attacks Malema

› JZ hails Miss World effect

› Hero pilot in sharky landing

› Mandela Bay mayor booted

› Oprah calls time on show

Yesterday, 20 November 2009

› Pretoria cops chase, kill

› Heat on BEE lawbreakers

› Oprah calls time on show

› Youth leader says sorry

› SACP attacks Malema

Everyone's doing it. Even celebrities. Robert Pattinson wants one. Reece Witherspoon and Jake Gyllenhaal are struggling with one. And real desperate housewife Eva Longoria says she's having one.

Welcome to the world of air miles, Skype and estranged love.

Are long distance relationships feasible? Are they even considered real relationships? With the world growing smaller and smaller, there seems to be a prolific rise in relationships that require only a few physical visitations a year.

After Googling this last night, one so-called Long Distance Relationship Expert from Bunion, Illinois, threw out that more than 10 million couples are doing it as we speak. That's 20 million people who are separated or otherwise sitting in personal chat rooms making an actual go of it. Perhaps people have become more independent, or perhaps they've simply become pickier.

Call me sceptical...

Call me sceptical, but there has to be an element of realism here. Do long distance liaisons last? Maybe when couples make committed and regular plans to meet up, or embark on transatlantic activities in unison, it could work.

But a little voice of reason still fuels the cynic inside me: surely physical touch and day-to-day routine cement a relationship? Surely these liaisons hit a glass ceiling in one way or another, eventually?

Although, couples who live far away from one another usually get into some nitty-gritty conversations, perhaps going so far as to explain exactly what they want to do together, naked, when they next see each other. Perhaps they even talk more than regular couples, if chat and Mxit can be regarded as 'regular' conversation.

However, let's use a not-so-practical example.

I don't see Leona Lewis doing this. She's the only celebrity who croons about bleeding love and does a jolly good job at it. And maybe it is because she lives so far away from her little crumpet. Or so the tabloids report.

She's quoted as generally being unfazed by the 'whole distance thing', and says she keeps the love alive with email, webcams and texts.

Virtual safety-net

On the other hand, long distance couples won't muck about. Having a screen as a mediator and, in some cases, translator, the ever-faithful personal computer builds a safety-net between two people.

Rejection over instant messenger is maybe five times less harsh than face to face. God only knows it's easier to write eternal truths when you've had too much wine and the person in question is merely a pop-up box. It's easier; it's how geeks and old men get lucky.

I'd have to imagine that you get to find out more about a person through long-distance chatting. More than, say, if you have your limbs intertwined and you're sucking on each other's faces every five minutes.

In essence, long-distance relationships aren't an affliction just for us mere mortals, with poor internet connection and a phone bill the size of a McDonald's Whopper. With overpopulation being a serious global problem, one would think that finding a special somebody in your hometown would be relatively easier than keeping things hot with someone who lives in, say, Yemen.

But long distance may just be a symptom of a heightened awareness of what you really want in a person. And perhaps people are willing to go the distance for something real. Even if it is virtual.