Sex & Love

　　在《盛女愛作戰》中，我的角色並非挑選盛女，而是負責為她們找適合的男人。這工作聽來簡單，但實在很不容易，因為小姐們會隨時改變主意，不喜歡拍這場或那場，到最後一刻，可能換了女主角！我明明安排了一個四十多歲適合配Florence的，可來的卻是二十多歲的Bonnie，好頭痛。更難的情況是，我對她們要求的理解與她們實在所想的，有差別。

　　SK和Gobby這對便是一個例子。當時我按指示，找一個年過30、高大英俊、親切有風度、受過良好教育、言談大方得體、有幽默感、事業有成，而且有較高收入的單身男人。我找到SK，他條件都符合，5尺9寸高，有航空工程學的大學文憑，外表俊朗，是一位收入頗豐的飛機師。

　　最初我以為SK很符合Gobby的條件，但很不幸地，「相睇」前我一直沒有機會和Gobby見面，導致那次較失敗。Gobby的要求，可能就是幻想多年的白馬王子，但王子適合自己嗎？她沒想過。SK周遊列國，廣見廣聞，學富五車。自少在歐洲長大，中文講得不太流利，常會加入一些英文字句幫助表達，但Gobby很多時都聽不明，兩個人找不到共同話題，更何況深入的交流？結果整晚，他們在沉默中度過。

　　不知從那時開始，很多未婚男女都總會儲備一大堆一廂情願的擇偶條件，寫滿長長的一條清單。他們內心在夢想，對方一定要具備某些優點才算是好伴侶，若達不到「標準」，便會被Out。 狂熱地信奉「擇偶清單」的人為忙於盲目追求他們的「理想」，絕少會理智地去檢討自己清單上所要求的條件究竟是否合理？是否不切實際？是適合「幻想」的我？還是適合「真」的我？許多花費了光陰、心血、感情而最終失敗者其實是被自己設置的條件所拖累——有點像沒有水的鐵達尼號，乾沉沒下去。為甚麼？因為「清單」弄錯了。

　　我同意尋找伴侶時，一些基本條件及原則一定要堅守，但其他細節，無需太苛刻，順其自然吧。我個人認為擇偶清單是無用的，甚至有害，除非那些條件是絕對誠實的。

　　要列一份徹底的，全面的，充分的「誠實」清單並不是無可能，但真的非常困難，因為首先你要很深入了解自己，然後辨別真實與虛幻，還要承認或面對有些深藏心底多年的陰霾。事實上，很少人會有這般勇氣或專門技巧去做得到。

　　荷里活著名女影星伊麗莎白•泰萊在下嫁第7任丈夫福坦基之前，她以為自己有足夠經驗列一份完美的「擇偶清單」，但她的第7段婚姻也是離婚收場……當年朝臣和政客們幫查理斯王子甄選王妃，而戴安娜表面上亦是符合所有「清單」條件的最完美人選……

　　事實上，愈長的「擇偶清單」就愈無意義。很多所謂「擇偶必須」的美德，如「忠心」、「義氣」等根本非一朝一夕可觀察到的，强制性加插入清單只會被無形的條件限制住，另自己不斷猜度，最終變得更多疑或吹毛求疵。

　　放棄你所謂的擇偶清單吧！做一個有智慧的人，用心去感受，用智慧去愛，這勝過任何一份擇偶清單！

　　（按：中文內容乃翻譯及撮寫版本）

The List of Criteria

　　In Brides Wannabe’s, I did not have anything to do with the selection of women; my job was just to find the men. I knew it was imperative to follow briefings, nevertheless, hard as I tried, it was difficult sometimes because the lady planned for one scene may suddenly change her mind & the last minute substitute would have a different list of criteria … Or worse still, my own interpretation of given criteria would differ substantially in scale .

　　The Hawaiian BBQ would be an example. My briefing was to find a man, “ 30+, handsome, tall, debonair, well educated, well spoken, has a sense of humor, a brilliant career in the high income group ..”  I found SK, who is 5’9”, has degrees in Aeronautical Engineering, good looking, an airline pilot earning a handsome living...I thought he met all the requirements .

　　Unfortunately, I didn’t get to meet Gobby until that very evening, & it was a disastrous mismatch. SK spoke Chinese interpolated by English expressions and she didn’t understand. They couldn’t even find a common topic to hold a superficial conversation let alone any profound communication. The discomfort of their silence was palpable.

　　I do not know when the ritual of compiling such a list began, but many unmarried men and women tend to hoard an assembly of conditions and merits bordering between “wishful thinking” and fantasy, and proclaim this to be the “List of Criteria” in their quest, discarding anybody who fails to meet the check list, adamantly upholding it to the bitter end. Fervent followers have been known to be global in their reach, uncompromising in their ambition, almost nihilistic in their tactics ...and ultimately succumb, - kind of reminiscent of Titanic without the water. Why ? Because it is so easy to be wrong.

　　I will be the first to admit that in any union, the basic fundamentals have to be right. But once that is out of the way, the rest becomes irrelevant. I believe a list is useless, even harmful, unless it is utterly honest.

　　Yet to write a brutally honest list is immensely difficult if not impossible because it requires one to take a deep hard look into oneself first, skillfully separating facts from fiction, or perhaps admitting to stuff we have been filing away for years… and few have the courage or expertise to do so.

　　Elizabeth Taylor was married six times before Larry Fortensky, she thought she had enough experience to write a perfect list, she didn’t and the seventh marriage also ended in divorce…An entire troupe of courtier & politicians helped Prince Charles write the list, and Diana ticked all the boxes …

　　The truth is, the longer the list, the more meaningless it becomes. A lot of the qualities , e.g. loyalty, reliability…etc. one wouldn’t find out until many years later anyway, so how is this collection of vague requirements going to help ? Getting muddled up in this quagmire of “qualities” one starts to analyse and over-analyse; guess, assess and second guess…justify the arbitrary, define the intangible, interpret tell-tale signs, read something in situations which isn’t there…one becomes critical, judgmental, paranoid… It hurts more than helps.

　　Why not abandon your laundry list, stop ticking boxes and just be your normal intelligent self.

　　Feel with your heart and love with your brain, believe me, that beats any list.

　　晚上八時許下班，到街角餐廳買外賣，轉入後街，在便利店前過馬路，再走一段路回家，風雨不改。

　　提著熱烘烘的外賣，在行人綠燈亮起前，靜靜在便利店前守候。便利店對街的落地玻璃後，出現熟識的面孔。坐在長桌前吃著微波爐小吃，分量所見，相信是他的晚餐，每晚如是。

　　裇衫、西褲、黑皮鞋，應該是同區的上班族。她不知道對方是夜班打工仔，還是跟她一樣，是天天加班的基層員工。

　　便利店固定的金屬椅子上，他雙腿擠壓出的線條格外性感、好看。桌下昏暗的大腿間，今晚開了天窗——忘記拉拉鏈。白色的一角是恤衫的衣角，還是純白小三角？傳統、簡約、不花巧，她的心跳聲大到幾乎對面行人路也聽得到。

　　天窗可一不可再，除了回味，就只能期待。隔著玻璃的他，已察覺到她的異樣，漫不經心張開雙腿，展示她看不到，但想看到的秘境。意識上的裸露令他莫名興奮，她可察覺得到？

　　第二天晚上，他買了更多食物，靜靜在便利店守候她路過。八時半左右，她提著外賣在面前出現。二話不說，把寫了字的便條貼在玻璃上，嚇得他把嘴裏的食物噴到桌上。

　　他尷尬地四處張望，面紅得像辣椒醬。街上的她忍不住偷笑，一直盯著他幽幽的胯下。他冒著汗環顧四周，深信沒其他人看見，慢慢張開腿，拉開褲鏈，露出內褲回答便條上的問題。

　　綠色行人燈亮起，她匆匆撕下寫上「白色？」，然後走過對面行人路，邊走邊笑回家。綠燈不停閃動，他才驚醒衝出便利店。可惜她已消失眼前，剩下忘了拉上的小天窗，在昏暗街上擾擾攘攘。

　　這晚，她如常到餐廳買外賣，他已在門外守候。

　　「你每晚也光顧這家餐廳？」他吸一口氣問。

　　「你——」

　　「留意到膠袋上的餐廳名字，我是來等你的。」

　　「有事？」心跳漸漸加速，期待好事即將發生。

　　「一起吃飯好嗎？」她呆了片刻，「今天不用寫便條貼吧？」她笑得合不攏嘴。

　　今晚他天窗全開，劃上的句號，也許是白色的。