Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Relationships
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-28-2014, 03:35 AM
 
2,183 posts, read 2,197,906 times
Reputation: 1852

Advertisements

There's a cutoff date to be able to fall in love?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-28-2014, 06:20 AM
 
15,013 posts, read 21,606,283 times
Reputation: 12334
Quote:
Originally Posted by jma501 View Post
The men in their 40s might not need the sex they used to but if they are like me they certainly do want it and very often. I made my own point and in no way, shape, or form, does that align with your woman bashing agenda.
Yay!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-28-2014, 06:54 AM
 
2,183 posts, read 2,197,906 times
Reputation: 1852
Quote:
Originally Posted by srjth View Post
Yay!
Lol.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-28-2014, 08:20 AM
 
Location: moved
13,608 posts, read 9,644,958 times
Reputation: 23390
Folks, we're losing track of the essential point here. While it's specious and ultimately vain to reduce all of human affection (romantic love, filial love, national patriotism, religious devotion and so forth) to material exchange, evolutionary pressures imply that successful organisms will seek to maximize personal utility. That "utility" manifests itself in subtle ways, and sometimes the utility of the group trumps the utility of the individual. Even so, if people didn't seek to maximize the "quality" of the person with whom they eventually mate, this would be an evolutionary disadvantage, and would presumably become obsolesced by natural selection.

Recently we had a thread about dating "leagues", wherein I vehemently disagreed about pigeonholing people in leagues. Why? Not because the jostling of potential partners can't be described in economic terms, but because the metrics of value are ambiguous and are irreducible to direct, actionable advice. One can not take some self-assessment quiz to determine one's league, and even if that were possible, how would we proceed to contact prospective daters who are specifically members of our designated league?

"Love" develops as response to long-term association. If two people become romantically involved, raise kids together and so forth, there's a stark cost for them to ditch their present partner in favor of an "upgrade". There needs to be a countervailing force precluding too easy an economic exchange. Love, I think, serves that function. If A loves B, but along comes C – a partner of higher mating-value – then love is the mechanism that keeps A from leaving B. Otherwise B's offspring would be at an evolutionary disadvantage.

In sum, love isn't strictly speaking a "joke", but it has a utilitarian value, and isn’t some holy and ineffable thing. Further, the route to love – how potential partners select each other – is, I think, very aptly described by economic terms. We gain comfort from realizing this, because it helps to explain our romantic failures and success. Unfortunately, such realization, though breathtaking satisfying in an intellectual sense, does not equip us with actionable advice on how to improve our "love lives". And thus the frustration.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-28-2014, 08:30 AM
 
Location: RI, MA, VT, WI, IL, CA, IN (that one sucked), KY
41,938 posts, read 36,838,343 times
Reputation: 40634
Quote:
Originally Posted by jma501 View Post
There's a cutoff date to be able to fall in love?

No, as you get older, both genders tend to have their guard up a bit more. The good candidates do. It makes sense. Good candidates tend to have their lives together, are happy with their lives, don't need another person, so if they couple is isn't because they're lonely or need someone, or even because they want sex, it is because they adore the other person. They don't jump right into things. Some see it as jaded, I see it as being pragmatic and being in no rush. Most adults I know don't need instant coupling right away, but we're willing to take our time to see if the person is a good match... the instant chemistry/sparks is always nice, but that doesn't always lead to love or healthy relationships. We're just a bit more balanced and stable... that doesn't mean incapable of falling in love. This is, again, both genders, not just men.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-28-2014, 08:45 AM
 
5,121 posts, read 6,788,364 times
Reputation: 5833
Quote:
Originally Posted by timberline742 View Post
No, as you get older, both genders tend to have their guard up a bit more. The good candidates do. It makes sense. Good candidates tend to have their lives together, are happy with their lives, don't need another person, so if they couple is isn't because they're lonely or need someone, or even because they want sex, it is because they adore the other person. They don't jump right into things. Some see it as jaded, I see it as being pragmatic and being in no rush. Most adults I know don't need instant coupling right away, but we're willing to take our time to see if the person is a good match... the instant chemistry/sparks is always nice, but that doesn't always lead to love or healthy relationships. We're just a bit more balanced and stable... that doesn't mean incapable of falling in love. This is, again, both genders, not just men.
I have to agree with this. I have a really good life. I am (overall) happy, have everything I need, I have a good, well paying job, I own my own home and have no debts, a lot of the things I want are within my reach or are within my reach with a little discipline (like taking time to save money for a vacation or something) and, pretty much, life is pretty darn good for me.

Sometimes I feel lonely and I go though periods of wanting to find a man to share my life with. But then I get a dose of the drama that goes on in the lives of my friends or I go though the frustration of trying to appeal to men and I wonder.... why am I doing this? Why rock the boat? Things are good and I am happy, why do I want to spoil that?

I go though cycles though. A month or so of wanting to be with someone and share my life... followed by a few months of thinking of my life in terms of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it."

But I still fall in love. I fell pretty deeply for the man I dated a little while back. We seemed to have a good connection, enjoyed each other's company, and he seemed to look forward to spending time with me. Even now that we are just friends just yesterday he sent me a message referring to my naked body. When I think of him, it still makes me a little sad that he didn't want a relationship (all he wanted was casual dating and sex). I am really not a FWB type of woman, so I had to let him go. He's older than me (13 years) so maybe he's got that "jaded" outlook too. Although I swear he, more than anyone, complains about being alone and not having a woman in his life. Guess I wasn't the right one and it's over. That stinks... when you have feelings for someone and they don't have them back. But it is what it is.

But going back to this thread in general... I cared for him. I wouldn't call it love since that takes two. But I cared for him deeply and could easily have loved him. And it didn't make any kind of "economic" sense. In fact, "economically", it was a poor choice (for me anyway). But that's what love is (or in this case the seeds of love).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-28-2014, 09:02 AM
 
2,183 posts, read 2,197,906 times
Reputation: 1852
Quote:
Originally Posted by timberline742 View Post
No, as you get older, both genders tend to have their guard up a bit more. The good candidates do. It makes sense. Good candidates tend to have their lives together, are happy with their lives, don't need another person, so if they couple is isn't because they're lonely or need someone, or even because they want sex, it is because they adore the other person. They don't jump right into things. Some see it as jaded, I see it as being pragmatic and being in no rush. Most adults I know don't need instant coupling right away, but we're willing to take our time to see if the person is a good match... the instant chemistry/sparks is always nice, but that doesn't always lead to love or healthy relationships. We're just a bit more balanced and stable... that doesn't mean incapable of falling in love. This is, again, both genders, not just men.
This makes sense as I am 45 and I would say I am guarded but not jaded. Pragmatic is an excellent word for it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-28-2014, 09:18 AM
 
26 posts, read 25,773 times
Reputation: 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryManback View Post
The relationship world really does work in economic terms It's every man/woman for hisself/herself, trying to get the best product to show off as a trophy, to conform to social pressures of being attached, to take care of their sexual needs, to provide a personal sense of validation, or to provide some other type of utility. People have market values and they try to sell when their market value is at its highest. That's why women try to get attached when they're in their prime years of looks, the young adult years, and why men in those years who are moving up the income ladder want to wait and see what caliber of women they can score in the future. Tall men have higher market values than short men, period. People make upgrades when they have the opportunity to. People settle when they have to. Typically, people will try to justify their shortcomings by pretending like they didn't settle, like the person they ended up with was their first choice.

I know it sounds shallow to think in terms of market values and upgrades and the like, but that's really the way that things work. People are not drawn to each other because of love, but for a variety of social and psychological reasons. It's plain to see that the relationship world is just a sexual economy. Look around.
I like to think of this as the sexual market place myself.

It is an unfettered commodities market. Preto's Law applies in a major way.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-28-2014, 09:30 AM
 
Location: moved
13,608 posts, read 9,644,958 times
Reputation: 23390
Quote:
Originally Posted by jillabean View Post
... I am (overall) happy, have everything I need, I have a good, well paying job, I own my own home and have no debts, a lot of the things I want are within my reach or are within my reach with a little discipline (like taking time to save money for a vacation or something) and, pretty much, life is pretty darn good for me.

Sometimes I feel lonely and I go though periods of wanting to find a man to share my life with. But then I get a dose of the drama that goes on in the lives of my friends or I go though the frustration of trying to appeal to men and I wonder.... why am I doing this? Why rock the boat? Things are good and I am happy, why do I want to spoil that?...
I'm astonished by the contrast between what I read on this forum, and what I observe amongst my coworkers (engineers in the Midwest, working in the defense-sector). All of my coworkers are men. All are married (or are widowers). Nearly all have stay-at-home wives, and nearly all have children. Other than minivans and smart-phones, soccer-practice and internet connections, there's little about their lives that differs from the 1950s. I don't assert that everyone is immersed in unbridled bliss, that there are no domestic arguments or frustrations. But apart from a few outliers in the floor above us or the office-building across the street, there are no divorces. Marriages end when one of the partners dies. Our workforce is quite elderly, with the median age well over 50, and several in their 70s.

Jillabean is quite right about the importance of self-reliance. But I want to emphasize the distinction between operational self-reliance and emotional self-reliance. Operationally, it is essential to save for your own retirement, to be able to cook and do laundry, to have health insurance, to be able to unclog toilets and to mend torn pants. Operationally most of us can survive just fine - and even thrive - as solitary individuals. But what about the emotional side? Here in the American Midwest we just had a brutal winter. I can trudge through the snow alone, start an ornery old car on a below-zero morning, stay warm alone by turning up the heat or using extra blankets, make a pot of coffee on Saturday morning and enjoy it alone, with a good book and the stereo playing softly. But... what about the emotional side? I miss sitting together with somebody else next to the fireplace. I miss making a pot of coffee for two cups and two drinkers. I miss a warm body underneath that warm blanket.

All of that operational self-reliance, the feeding of one's 401K plan and doing maintenance on one's car and scoring a rare find at the used book store and cooking some new dish from a newly discovered recipe... these things just don't have the momentum, the impetus and significance that they would have had, had one had a partner.

I don't understand how somebody could behold this emotional component and still assert that happiness is possible while confined to the solitary life. Sure, I get out of bed every morning. But I do it from a sense of duty. I live my solitary life and contribute at work and save money and exercise and so forth, and I do it regularly, without moping or phlegmatic slowness, but I do that from a sense of duty - NOT pleasure or joy or satisfaction. Emotionally alone, I am reduced to a machine that does what it's supposed to do. Maybe I've very good at it. This machine still goes to the museum and to concerts - because that's part of the duties of an active citizen. But it does things as a machine.

I don't want to be a machine. And that will take a new and enduring partnership with another human being.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-28-2014, 09:37 AM
 
26 posts, read 25,773 times
Reputation: 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by ohio_peasant View Post
I'm astonished by the contrast between what I read on this forum, and what I observe amongst my coworkers (engineers in the Midwest, working in the defense-sector). All of my coworkers are men. All are married (or are widowers). Nearly all have stay-at-home wives, and nearly all have children. Other than minivans and smart-phones, soccer-practice and internet connections, there's little about their lives that differs from the 1950s. I don't assert that everyone is immersed in unbridled bliss, that there are no domestic arguments or frustrations. But apart from a few outliers in the floor above us or the office-building across the street, there are no divorces. Marriages end when one of the partners dies. Our workforce is quite elderly, with the median age well over 50, and several in their 70s.
This is Marriage 1.0.

Marriage 2.0 is much, much more brutal (for men especially).

Things changed radically with the 60's in more ways than one.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Relationships
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:18 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top