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 wondered if some people chose their mate by deciding the type of mate they wanted and looking for that
in a person or did they respond biologically (physically, not mentally) to someone they met and dated and fell in love even if that person did not tick all their "must have" list.
I knew women who had specific requirements: tall, good job or future career, nice car, same religion as them, college graduate, etc. To me that is an intellectual decision not biological.
Thank you, OP. So, in a nutshell: mental checklist vs. going with your gut. Or your....whatever.
1. What was MOST important to you in choosing your mate: sexual attraction or something else (what?)
2. Would you choose differently in a do-over (maybe you already had a do-over so did that work?)
3. Is long-term marriage unnecessary once children are grown?
4. Are you married now (how long), divorced, never married
1) I married my (ex) husband because i considered him my intellectual equal at the time. But also because he came from a good family, he was a sweet down to earth guy and if im honest i knew our genes would mix well, he was this tall athletic Scandinavian blond hair blue eyes. Im a curvy Asian girl with the typical almond shaped eyes and full lips. Our kids are tall athletic with my features and a golden brown hair.
2) If i had a chance to do it over i wouldnt have married him, i would have figured out what was important to me first and found a mate that valued the same. We ended up as roommates because the sexual chemistry was never there.
3) Marriage is based on love, i dont believe in staying married to someone you dont love regardless of the childrens ages.
4) I was married for 12yrs. Officially divorced 10 months (separated 2yrs)
Forgot, OP wanted questions answered specifically...
Quote:
1. What was MOST important to you in choosing your mate: sexual attraction or something else (what?)
2. Would you choose differently in a do-over (maybe you already had a do-over so did that work?)
3. Is long-term marriage unnecessary once children are grown?
4. Are you married now (how long), divorced, never married
1. I struggle to understand the way many people experience attraction. It feels more like intellectual curiosity to me. I have never spotted someone visually and wanted them. For me it's not, "He's hot, wanna smash," instead it's "we had this 2 hour conversation and I came away from it feeling good, I'm curious what he's like in bed now..." The only visual/physical stuff is that he is not SO hideous or SO pretty that it actually turns me off. So lack of deal-breakers, plus stimulating conversation = me being attracted enough to consent to sex and see where it goes from there. Unless I am in "taken mode." I don't think of other people with that sense of sexual curiosity then.
2. Yeah, I had a do-over. So you talk about "choosing a mate" like I selected a partner with all intent right away of building a life together. That's crazy (to me.) I didn't do that. I selected a guy to have sex with and maybe be with for a while, but he made it more serious than what I really wanted at age 18. The "do-over," I selected a guy to partner me at certain events at first, then to have sex with and date with no real commitment, then to be exclusive with, then to move in with, then to discuss marriage with (over a period of 3 years.) At 18, red flags were disregarded, at 36, I was stepping slow and cautious and watchful for them. Neither time did I point at a guy and say, "You! You shall be my mate!"
3. I don't think that kids are the best reason to be married anyways. I don't know why people continue to believe this. My ex and I didn't legally marry until 10 years and 2 kids in. We lost a big tax refund when we married, but he was going into the military so it made sense at that time. My boyfriend and I will likely marry in a few years after my youngest is grown, because it will make things easy with regard to insurance, inheritance, Social Security, medical directives...just a pile of stuff. I think that each couple should analyze their situation and figure out if marriage is beneficial or not. Additionally, with the ex, the marriage and divorce were not that big a deal IMO. Bureaucratic errands, nothing more. No one is on the hook for alimony or child support. The emotional break up was brutal, the legal end, not so much. And having kids bound us far more than marrying did. If we didn't have kids together, I would not even speak to him now; because we do have kids, we still have to deal with each other.
4. Divorced. Hope to remarry in a few years, as it will be beneficial to my boyfriend and I in the future we are planning together. If we get there and he doesn't want to, or things have changed, I'm ok with that, too. We will never have kids. That plays no part in this decision.
No, intelligent people aren’t animals, they are able to understand and control their impulses. Neither my fiancé nor I ever want kids and I’m closer to 40 than 30 now. Hasn’t ever interested either of us and any girl who expressed any desire to have kids I immediately ended any serious contact with. My strongest drive is glory, not kids. You can “live on” for a little bit through your kids, but you can live on forever through great works of art or great achievements.
For me, as with anything in my life, I wanted it all or nothing at all. I wouldn’t have settled for any girl who wasn’t gorgeous, smart, and a great personality. I’m not a lonely person, I love my life and always have, so there was never going to be any settling or weighing this or that, no hot bimbos, no smart but plain girls, must be beautiful, very smart, and sweet / considerate plus no kids wanted. I was told I had too high of standards and I’d never find this mythical girl, but I did, and I’m glad I waited. Frankly I only expect in a girl the same things I offer as a guy, keeping myself in ideal physical shape and caring about my appearance, thoughtful and intelligent, and loyal and considerate to my friends and family. It’s always fair to ask the same of a partner that you offer, I think.
I'm not sure why so many people seem to think that human beings taking logic and emotions into consideration when taking a mate goes against biology. Isn't our brain, including abstract thinking and certain emotional needs in order to thrive, the largest, most prominent point in our survival evolution? Our evolving intellect and reasoning is part of our biology and our evolution and has been for, at the very minimum, 2.5 million years.
Saying choosing a mate on anything other than literal rutting physical attraction "goes against our biology" is a serious head-scratcher. It is our biology. We do not survive on thick claws. We do not survive on extreme speed, or an extraordinary sense of smell. Our eyes are fairly good, and we can see in color, but we can't see predators coming in the dark. We don't birth in litters of 5, 6 or more (usually) to spread our species faster, or in hundreds like some insects do. In fact, more than a singleton birth until fairly recently was considered dangerous and both infants did not necessarily survive. We don't survive on bulk/size or thick hair to protect us from the cold, or an ability to run up trees quickly. What do we survive on, and have we survived on in increasing increments (amping up about 250,000 years ago with a second giant wave, heralding H. sapiens sapiens, 50,000 years ago)? Our intellect and our ability to think in rounded ways that do not only include immediacy and immediate needs or wants.
In fact, selecting a mate based on only the physical goes against our biology, more than two million years of it. Yes, "cave men" (if you will) too. It's obvious they had hierarchy, pair-bonding or protection of groups of females by a leading male, a sense of art (starting about 50,000 years ago), etc...if just a quick pop will do in order to continue our species (we're talking humans here) then why all that?
It's a cop-out and lazy (or shallow, or sometimes, fear-based/avoidant) to say you "have to" choose a mate just based on his/her looks "because of biology." And it's flat-out incorrect.
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.
