I take this letter pretty much to be what it is on its face. The writer's friends are asking her for advice on dating. Why wouldn't they? She seems like a reasonable person to ask as she seems successful and, for good reasons, satisfied, in her own relationship. Who better to seriously ask?

Sorry if I am being repetious of other comments. I have not had a chance to read them all. I agree with some of what I did read that the first case is easier. The writer seems to have a pretty good understanding so I trust her judgement that case 1 is not a cold person that is incapable of bonding, so much as a person that has developed some "style" issues. It is not easy for anyone to change, by it seems easier to change this kind of style thing that most things one does. And I have to agree with some of what I read that it is hardly a big insult to tell someone that people that like her are finding it hard to figure out that she likes them. She is probably thinking people do not like her. She probably has the exact problem she is sending out. She cannot read other people's signals and is missing that some of them out there like her a lot more that she imagines. I would rather hear that than hear that people I like like me, in fact think I am a jerk! Where the heck in the insult.

As for case 2, I am old enough to know that you could well be looking at life long trouble there. I can definitely think of people that I know who stayed single because they were just too picky, and their pickiness was for inconsequential reasons. Over time, it seemed like they tried to become less picky, but it was hard. Somehow in most every case I think of, they somehow missed a window of opportunity. On the other hand, I do not know that any of them feel all that bad about it, either. Also, at base, all of us--me, you, Woody Allen--are attracted to who we are attracted to. The heart knows what it wants and can be darn insistent about it. If a tall, muscular guy is what does it for this woman, for better or worse, sensible or not, maybe that is what she really needs and she will have to slide on the other traits even thought they seem more important in a mate. So what if my life mate is not bring in the big bucks if she turns me on, quickens my pulse everyday of my life. Fills out the yen and yang in my own particualr life. Who is anyone to say that that is something to give up for more practical traits? Sounds to me like that tall and muscular part may be what really draws her, but she has to have the other stuff because she will lose face with friends and family if she does not get that, too.

A good and thoughtful read. Easy to be critical, but I would think is it better to rejoice at someone, at a couple, finding their way.

Before reading the other responses, I was just going to say "As 'they used to say' 'Right on Brother" to both LW and Cary. And as 'they say now' 'true that' and 'word!' to Cary."

I really liked the letter and Cary's response is exactly why I bother to read his column. This ain't no Anne Landers. I am not reading it for a terse "helpful" response. Cary's free associative writings really seem to help me expand my thinking on the particular concerns raised by the LW and on life in general. That seems way more useful and interesting than succinct to the point advice on particular points, which I think Cary also supplied in any event.

I thought what LW did was just fine, by the way, and whatever he wants to do after that will be fine, too. In my own familial experience, full-blown, active alcoholics are going to pretty unpredictable, irrational, etc., and there is no particular approach that is likely to bring any changes. LW gave it a shoot. He at least tried to be of help. Maybe what he said will actually kick in later. In the meantime, so what the guy is pissed off. At least LW did what he thought he should do and does not have to live with any "what ifs." I completely agree that no one trying to deal with a full blown active alcohol should let himself have any investment in having that whatever he does obtaining a particular result. And Cary is completely right to watch out for any rescue fantasies. Detachment is self-preservation. Attachment to particular wished for results is not likely to help anyone.

Wow, 374 letters and still counting. What a great initial letter. A real Rorschach. No editor's picks though. Wonder what the editors are trying to say.

I still think that Cary's response was correct. The most important thing is to try to heal the rift with the brother. And the best way to attempt to do that is to apologize sincerely and without some accompanying attack on him.

Whether or not the brother's initial request was appropriate or his reaction justified, seems to me that it ought to be easy to justify a sincere apology because the sister agreed to do something, and then did, really, willfully the exact opposite.

After that, it is true that one cannot change the past. And it is true that this approach might or might work. But at least the sister will have given the most important thing her best shot. As others indicate, I think after that she goes on with her life whether or not this fixes things with her brother.