Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I have no use for any compensation other than hourly. If I'm not working, I see no reason to be paid. I do not take paid breaks at work, only the unpaid one I am required to take...and only because I am required to take it, by law. I figure if I'm getting paid, I should be working for it.
Why would you take pride in NOT taking vacations and not taking advantage of the benefits that a company offers you? Do you accept any kind of 401k bonus, insurance...? If not, it is because you have a menial hourly job or you are boneheaded. If you have a career, these benefits are part of your salary. A career is your life's work. It isn't just what you do for the hours of the day that you are there. It is what you are trained to do through education, experience and training. I lay in bed thinking about designs that I'm working on. I discuss projects over beer after work. I don't get paid for that time, I don't expect to. I enjoy what I do, I've worked hard for it and I will reap ALL the benefits that my career provides me.
Might explain why men are highly attracted to young women and, conversely, find women past their early 30s to be much less desirable.
Maybe that is so, or maybe they're just egotistical jerks who haven't figured out that they are no longer young. I too can see the physical beauty of a young man, but that doesn't mean I think I should date someone young enough to be my son. Remember mankind has a mind, which allows us to know that our desires are not always meant to be acted upon.
Our society is directed towards the visual and action and youth. Just look at all the computer graphics in movies. That means men are trained, natural impulses aside, to not place the human mind foremost in seeking a mate. It may be a contributor to the 50% divorce rate.
Societies that are more philosophic have a certain respect for the wisdom that sometimes comes with age and even though I don't like the idea of arranged marriages, parents may look for stability and common values and intellectual levels in such matters than their offspring. Sometimes in such societies marriage is to the reliable woman who will be a good role model for the kids and the sweet young mindless thing is kept on the side for entertainment.
But you can't put kids in school at 1-3 years because they are not toilet trained.
My grandson not 1 year yet, will be in March, has been in Day Care nearly all his life so far. His mother works as does my son. My son is a college grad, finding no work in that field, he is a carpenter, finding less than enough he joined the Guard.
He works 2 jobs, she works 1 full time in insurance, and cares for their child. I might guess combined they earn 75,000 a year and that isn't close to enough.
It is a muckymuck world we made, but Day Care can do diapers just fine.
I found it odd, that my grandson didn't fear me. After all he isn't yet a year, and oddly walks... But I am big, and really fuzzy, aka biker. Most guys in a 3 piece suit fear me for a look, and yet this little guy is stable and sees no problem at all.
Maybe that is so, or maybe they're just egotistical jerks who haven't figured out that they are no longer young. I too can see the physical beauty of a young man, but that doesn't mean I think I should date someone young enough to be my son. Remember mankind has a mind, which allows us to know that our desires are not always meant to be acted upon.
Are you sayin it's wrong to trade in my 40 year old wife for (2) 20's?
naw I am 58, she just turned 48, and I was joking. We'er hitched!
Maybe that is so, or maybe they're just egotistical jerks who haven't figured out that they are no longer young. I too can see the physical beauty of a young man, but that doesn't mean I think I should date someone young enough to be my son. Remember mankind has a mind, which allows us to know that our desires are not always meant to be acted upon.
A woman more than ten years...and that's stretching it....away from me in either direction isn't desirable. I prefer women with five years of my own age.
I question how valid this study is and the methods used...30 seems a bit early for women to start losing fertility...although for whatever its worth, it kind of balances out, because men start losing testosterone after 30 too, meaning their sex drive slowly begins to wane.
But I will add this: It would kind of make sense that women's fertility would begin to wane after 30..they mature reproductively much faster than men...however it takes them till 30 to start feeling as horny (sexually not reproductively) as men in their teens and twenties have always felt..which is odd...so I can see some truth in the proclamation
I question the validity of the study too or the narrowness of it's focus. If you look overseas at Western and Northern Europe you'll see a "postponement" of child bearing as well. In Scandinavia it is very common for a lot of women to have their first child in their 30's.
Females are developing quicker at a younger age, but I think the impact on child bearing is not as drastic as this article proposes.
I'm a middle aged man. Never married, no children. I've come to realize that marriage and family are increasingly unlikely for me....and much of this is the result of my career. Always away from home, traveling for work has meant little to no opportunity to "find" the "one" or "date". I honestly believe that children deserve, need young parents (mid 20's to mid 30's). If I were to be blessed with fatherhood TODAY...I'd be in my mid fifties by the time my child was ten....and in my sixties by the time they were twenty. That's a huge gap in physical abilities, mentality, emotions, history. I'll have little in common with this child and relating will be difficult. In short it will not be very fair to the child. Other kids would have busy active parents.
While your work life seems to be an obstacle to developing a relationship that could lead to a family (though it needn't be if you truly find someone with whom you have mutual love), I don't think your age is. I am in my early 30's and married to someone of my generation. BUT, prior to marriage, I dated someone who was 20+ years my senior. I never saw the age difference as a serious detriment. Having kids with a person in their 50's would indeed mean that they would be "elderly" when that kid is in their 20's, but what it boils down to is individual health and energy. My father is in his mid 60's and can run miles around many guys of my generation! I don't believe a man in his late 50's would be posing an unfair advantage to the child as they grew up. As long as you remain busy, active and engaged. And with all the traveling you do, it doesn't exactly sound like you lack in energy. Having a young child around when you eventually retire...it's really not inconceivable at all.
I have noticed over the years, that younger and younger girls are more developed physically, and are sexually active at younger ages.
Honestly, think back to your middle school and early high school days. If you can't remember, break out a year book.
The girls were completely different when I was younger. Now a 15 year old looks like a 20 year old, easily. Part of its dress, part of it is actual physical development at an early age.
Girls start their periods earlier then ever before. This is in due largely to the rich diet they enjoy, so their body begins its reproductive cycle earlier. I think the same thing is happening with them physically.
So when I saw this story today, on GMA, I thought, are we wrong on our sexual stereotypes?
People are looking down at girls who are having children at a young age. However, this evidence shows that by the time they are 30, they have only 10% of the chance they once did to actually reproduce.
I mean, by the time you are 26, the average age of college students graduating, then get a job, and establish yourself in a stable manner, you'd be 30 years old.
So, should we be encouraging sexual reproduction of girls at a younger age? And if they want to go to college later on, after they've had their children, would that not be more biologically normal at this point?
Just some curious thoughts I had when I saw that story. Thought I'd get everyones POV.
BTW, I am in no way saying we should have 15 year olds having kids with older men. I'm saying that girls in their late teens, to early 20's should probably have kids first, and then education second. That would be more biologically normal with what we are now seeing wouldn't it?
I do not believe in any type of social engineering. The thought of encoraging kids first and then education to me is so wrong. So what if women have less of a chance of having children. It is their choice and as such should accept the results of their choices. There are enough women out there having kids. We are not lacking human resources for sure. Also, there are enough teenage pregnancies going on anyways. Why add more to this social problem?
You have a great day.
El Amigo
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
