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.
Combination of A and B-have my new honey and baby while traveling the world and partying. If I had to pick, then A since I'm more than likely to be focused on family and raising leaders. If I really had to pick, I'd pick not going through a divorce at all and hopefully working something out...and traveling and partying.
It depends on what's more valuable to the person. Personally, I like the stability and companionship of life A. Its all about preference. My dad says if you start life A and get used to it, you're able to grow into it more than someone starting life A so late
Would I prefer my wild, fun filled, youth to the marriage I have, now? I married my wife, and she married me, after reverting to our "fun-filled" youths in mid-life and finding out that what we both wanted out of life had changed. Bed hopping had become empty. Neither of us could fully recover the thrills of our youth. We wanted both sex and security.
It depends on what's more valuable to the person. Personally, I like the stability and companionship of life A. Its all about preference. My dad says if you start life A and get used to it, you're able to grow into it more than someone starting life A so late
Given there are so many teen marriages that don't work, I'm not sure the stats would agree with starting life A early.
Two people recently divorced. Which one do you envy more based on the directions their lives have since taken. Both are in their early 40's.
Person A:
Has the house. Has a new partner. Matter of fact, they are expecting a child together. Basically jumped out of one long term marriage into another with little intervening 'free' time. But this person has a mate that loves them dearly, takes care of all their wants and needs, home cooking, home life, sex life. etc. But that person sometimes misses the single life and thinks maybe they got into another relationship too soon and sometimes feels a sense of being trapped. Sometimes envies person B for their life.
Person B:
Living single. Going out and living it up, partying, traveling, living a fun life of hedonistic debauchery. But this person is also starting their life over completely from scratch: living in an apartment, no foreseeable prospects for a long term steady mate, much less a family. So no one to look after in old age. Definitely no one to share holidays with. Sometimes envies person A for having the stable, albeit boring but sometimes hectic life that they didn't have together.
Which one is living the better life? Again, keep in mind that both are in their early 40s, not 20s.
It would seem to me that person B is definitely having more short term, 'in the moment' fun and living. Is going to bars and cruising dating sites at 40+ really wise? But is exquisitely rigged for a life of loneliness and financial hardship. Whereas person A is tied down but has a family in the works and appears to be building a solid future from both the family and financial angles.
Who is better off and who would you rather be?
There's an opportunity cost to any choice. Some people don't want to be or aren't cut out to be person A. Same for person B. I think both options are good, for the right person. It's also fairly typical for people to wonder about the road not taken.
B for sure. Jumping into a new relationship and having a kid right away isn't something you can just wake up one day and decide to change.
I'm in my late 30s and single (female). I love it. I am not lonely and poised to be miserable for the rest of my life. I don't expect children to look after me in my old age. I still have time to find a partner if I want one, but I have no desire whatsoever to have kids. Presumably B still has a job, still contributed something into social security and maybe has some retirement savings, so it isn't like he's out in a ditch somewhere with absolutely nothing.
That being said, if I had my druthers, I'd rather than be Person A. All that non-stop partying and, as you put it, hedonistic debauchery, gets seriously old after a while.
I pictured Charlie Sheen when you said that and now he has HIV because of that.
I pictured Charlie Sheen when you said that and now he has HIV because of that.
He claimed that he caught HIV after only two instances of unprotected sex.
Also, Person A might be as vulnerable to STIs and STDs as Person B...: "Being in a serious relationship has a lot of perks, but protection from sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) may not be one of them. According to a recent study, couples in monogamous relationships are just as likely to get an STD than those who openly have multiple sexual partners. The reason for this surprising conclusion? Infidelity."
After reading a few of the later responses, I see that what you've posted, OP, is a sort of Rorschach Test. People are projecting all kinds of things onto A and B, making wild assumptions, and writing their own narrative in conformance with their dreams. Pretty funny.
But Ruth ~ isnt that true of almost all threads?
OP makes a short, ambigious statement open to interpretation & interpolation,
subsequent posters come along and put their spin on it,
and in the end we know more about the biases & baggage of the subsequent posters than the OP, who never comes back to the thread to clarify their definitions.
You can make a case that A or B has a better, more fulfilling life,
and that A or B is a sorry loser, depending on where your values lay or lie.
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.