| Should over 50 people be less selective?
Posted: 11/18/2007 7:01:21 AM | "As for “looks” fading most things that make up “looks” remain the same. A person with high cheek bones will have high cheek bones all their life. Their eye color remains the same. The shape/symmetry of their face stays the same. Their height stays the same. While a person’s skin changes/ages that happens over a long period of time. The point being physical attraction is not fleeting as many suggest. "
No, Dave 1234, Looks, eye color, shape, symmetry, heigh, sking changes, do NOT stay the same as one ages, LOL. | |
|
| Should over 50 people be less selective?
Posted: 11/18/2007 7:26:21 AM | To add my two cents as to "should over 50 people be less selective?" Then my answer is NO! All my life I've owned and drove Cadillacs, my favorite car. I've owned other cars, Fords, Chevys, Saabs, etc. But to me, Caddys were dependable, elegant and handled quite well. I've always been built for comfort, not for speed. I want what I want and I didn't settle for an Escort.
Adaptation is more of a word I encompass. I have never felt "alone" when I was without a significant other. I have always had and still have active, festive people around me (young and old) and I still do the things I did in my youth! I have butt heads with aristrocrats and danced with wolves. Never, never settle. Settling to me is connotative with being lowered in the ground six feet under and I ain't ready yet! (LOL). Life just keeps on getting better and better! | |
|
| |
| Should over 50 people be less selective?
Posted: 11/18/2007 8:21:13 AM | (Msg 151) No, Dave 1234, Looks, eye color, shape, symmetry, heigh, sking changes, do NOT stay the same as one ages
Eye color changes? Maybe from a newborn to an infant but once the eye color is there, it's there. Bone structure changes? Maybe if they have a degenerative bone disease, otherwise, no.
(Msg 152) All my life I've owned and drove Cadillacs,
Now you're talking! Two friends of mine went to Florida for the winter and just bought used Cadillacs. The exchange rate is terrific and those selling have adjustable mortgages, below prime, and are being hit with a big increase. It's either sell the house or sell the car. One bought a Red Caddy convertible, last years model.
Yes, I am jealous!  On the other hand my classic car is in the garage and my sweety and I have our cars in the driveway and winter's coming. Where would I put it?
Then, again, I could temporarily park it in the living room if I knocked out a wall!
////////////////////////////////////////////////
Ahhh, who am I kidding. I went through this last year when I checked out the new Pontiac Solstice. My wife told me only old men trying to impress young women drive convertibles and she'd never get in one.
(And another dream dies.)
EDIT: Msg 153
I enjoy the illusion that if I was not so picky, anyone would have me anyway. Am I alone in this on the rainy bus stop?
LOL!! Good one! | |
|
| Should over 50 people be less selective?
Posted: 11/18/2007 9:38:44 PM | > Males in my generation were lesser in number due to Viet Nam.
> We didn't "replace" those with ones the same age.
In the big scheme of things, the number of men who died in Viet Nam, about 50,000, is not significant compared to the approximately 20 million men born in the ten year period which is relevant. This is not meant to diminish the size of the loss in any way.
> In any case, the figures I'd always heard were that there are about 3-4 females to every male
That's for POF Land only, all ages included.
Wikipedia - The "First World" G7 members all have a gender ratio (males to females) in the range of 0.95–0.98 for the total population:
1.05–1.07 at birth
1.05–1.06 for the group below 15
1.00–1.04 for the group aged 15–64
0.70–0.75 for those over 65
Somewhere I know I've seen it broken down better than just "15-64", but can't find the data quickly. Obviously the plotted curve on a graph of the data has to be smooth and continuous so there isn't some steep step down at age 64.
But gender ratios alone aren't really a significant part of the story because of the way mate value differs in the way it varies with age for the two sexes, going down for women and going up for men (with wide variations). From the posts in this thread, I'd say many women have this exactly backwards if their selectivity is any indication. | |
|
| |
| Should over 50 people be less selective?
Posted: 11/19/2007 3:14:18 AM |
From the posts in this thread, I'd say many women have this exactly backwards if their selectivity is any indication.
Without bothering with actual figures, yes, there are more women then men as you get older. And yes, to men, this must seem as thought women have it backwards! Men must think that women have less men available and so they would be LESS selective.
But most women aren't like that. They can support themselves and they have friends to have fun with and so most of them want meaningful love with a man not just casual sex. Let's be honest..........if women ARE into casual sex, there is usually a line of 5 to 10 men waiting for it..........she can have her pick!
But most women don't care what the numbers are. They only care about the one guy who will truly love and care about them and have fun with them......... | |
|
| Should over 50 people be less selective?
Posted: 11/19/2007 4:01:08 AM |
Let's be honest..........if women ARE into casual sex, there is usually a line of 5 to 10 men waiting for it..........she can have her pick! LOL! Friendldy! That is so true! If there is a so-called shortage of men....you couldn't prove it by me. LOL! and I'm not even having sex....casual or otherwise! I do however know a lot of women who are simply NOT interested in men....period, not being picky or not picky...they're just NOT interested.
They only care about the one guy who will truly love and care about them and have fun with them......... And the women said, "AMEN" | |
|
| Should over 50 people be less selective?
Posted: 11/19/2007 5:15:43 AM |
I do however know a lot of women who are simply NOT interested in men....period, not being picky or not picky...they're just NOT interested.
I know women and men that simply aren't interested. They really do fill their lives with fulfilling activities and don't put themselves on line with an "if the right one comes along" caveat. | |
|
| Should over 50 people be less selective?
Posted: 11/19/2007 6:44:25 AM |
They really do fill their lives with fulfilling activities and don't put themselves on line with an "if the right one comes along" caveat. I agree. However, it's usually the ones who have the most negative outlooks that do the loudest complaining about not being able to find someone who isn't picky! If they've already come to the conclusion that it's hopeless....why keep looking and trying to convince the rest of us that it's hopeless? LOL! Hey, I know....maybe they think that if they convince the rest of us how hopeless the situation is...then the ones left will be forced to be less picky...and then they'll (the complainers) will have a better chance at success!!! Hmmmm? | |
|
| Should over 50 people be less selective?
Posted: 11/19/2007 8:36:38 AM | IvoryRain888 wrote:
I say "never ever settle". Be wise and compromise!
The trouble is that for many people "compromise"="settle". For them, to compromise even a little means that they would be settling and God knows that you should never, ever do that otherwise it might mean TEOTWAWKI. Either that or a bad hair day. | |
|
| Should over 50 people be less selective?
Posted: 11/19/2007 9:26:30 AM | Hmmmm Just spent about 45 minutes reading some of the replies to this very intersting subject. I very seldom say anything in forums, but I think that I might actually have something to add, so here goes.
Call it whatever you like, "settle, compromise", it really doesn't matter. Sure it's hard to find that "little spark" that makes all the difference, but that is what it is all about, regardless of anything else. I, like everyone else have certain things that pique my interest, but that "little spark" is what it is all about, and if that isn't there, well.. maybe I have found a friend. One can't have too many friends.
The bottom line though.. is that I sure wouldn't want to be with anyone who decided to "settle" for me. I definitely want to be with someone who's day I can brighten, who's heart beats a little faster, and smiles when I arrive. Please DON'T SETTLE for me. I don't think either of us would be happy for very long, and I will keep meeting friends, and sometimes enjoying their company, until I find one where we both have that warm fuzzy feeling that makes the world go round.
Sorry I took so long to get to the point, but like I said, new at this... | |
|
| Should over 50 people be less selective?
Posted: 11/19/2007 10:24:39 AM |
Please DON'T SETTLE for me. I don't think either of us would be happy for very long, and I will keep meeting friends, and sometimes enjoying their company, until I find one where we both have that warm fuzzy feeling that makes the world go round. EXCELLENT, EXCELLENT POINT!!!! And I think if you'll pay close attention to the situation.....it's ONLY those who want OTHER people to "settle" in a "downward direction" that vehemently push "settling". | |
|
| Should over 50 people be less selective?
Posted: 11/19/2007 10:32:19 AM | Lifeofleisure!!! Thank you for looking up that info!
Wikipedia - The "First World" G7 members all have a gender ratio (males to females) in the range of 0.95–0.98 for the total population:
1.05–1.07 at birth
1.05–1.06 for the group below 15
1.00–1.04 for the group aged 15–64
0.70–0.75 for those over 65
So, this is wonderful news huh? LOL! The predictions are not nearly as dire and some would have us believe!
But gender ratios alone aren't really a significant part of the story because of the way mate value differs in the way it varies with age for the two sexes, going down for women and going up for men (with wide variations). From the posts in this thread, I'd say many women have this exactly backwards if their selectivity is any indication. Not exactly sure what you're trying to say here? Could you elaborate, clarify?
That's for POF Land only, all ages included. And, this is true....POF is ALL ages, but THIS post is addressed ONLY to those people who are OVER 50.
Interestingly...I saw a post earlier this morning (a different thread) which stated that there were 100 men to every (1) female on dating sites and claimed that to be the reason why men are passed by. LOL! I told him he needed to read this thread. | |
|
| Should over 50 people be less selective?
Posted: 11/19/2007 11:06:39 AM | | As we get older, and hopefully mature, we learn through life experiences what is impotant to us. This should make us more selective regardless of what the ratio might be. This doesn't mean we know it all, we should never stop learning, it just means we know more than we did in the past about what makes us happy. At this point in my life I don't want anyone to need me. I don't want to be a solution for someones problems regardless of what they may be. I need to be wanted, wanted for who I am, not for what I can do. | |
|
once_
|
Joined: 8/24/2007
Msg: 166 | |
| Should over 50 people be less selective?
Posted: 11/19/2007 12:03:43 PM | | Agreed.....I kinda feel that having lived this long, there's no reason to "accept" anything other than what I want.......and rejection is part of life......for me and the lady I may not choose to take things any further with.......we get over it. | |
|
notard
|
Joined: 1/10/2007
Msg: 167 | |
| Should over 50 people be less selective?
Posted: 11/19/2007 12:27:40 PM | | Actually the older I get and the more dating experience I get under my belt (pun intended) the more selective I become. I got married young, having very little dating experience. I really did not think about how it would work out between our families, what her objectives in life were, her values, how smart she was or was not, and many other factors. Although I blundered into the marriage I was quite fortunate in most respects. Anyway, today since most of the women I date have been married once or even twice, I consider their situation in many ways. Do her children like me and are they functioning well in their lives? Do my children like her? Does she experience problems with her exhusband or if widowed is she ready for another man in her life? Does she like men since she is usually divorced for one or more valid reasons due to her husband's behavior and treatment of her and probably has had some bad dating experiences? How are her finances? Does she manage her money well? Has she made prudent decisions about the choices she has faced in life? What are her values, her religious beliefs, her politics? Do we get along well? Are we able to easily resolve conflicts? These are just samples of what may need to be considered. The chance for a second or third marriage working out are not good and I do not want to go through another divorce. I want to be more selective, not less! | |
|
| Should over 50 people be less selective?
Posted: 11/19/2007 9:34:03 PM | Settle???? Oh GOOD GOD NO!!! In fact as I get older and gain more wisdom I am much more picky than I ever was. But I also don't get involved easily either. It takes a pretty special person for me to commit myself.
But at the same time I am very content to be single. I like my life and am very content. I do try on relationship shoes from time to time. Sometimes it works out and some times it doesn't. You can't make a man be where he doesn't want to be and the flip side is I will never choose a partner I am not happy with just to say I have a man.
Had enough miserable relationships in my 20's and 30's to finally figure out that if I'm not happy, I am free to move on.
My serenity is what counts and if a relationship is not working it's "Exit.... stage left" But if he's happy and I am happy we'll be together as long as the Goddess sees fit. Could be for a year, could be for a lifetime. I'm OK either way.
The problem as I see it is that society seems to think of people without a SO are failures at life. Nothing could be further from the truth. Trust me being single is never as bad as being in a marriage/relationship that either he's not into you are vice versa.
:))
Witchy | |
|
| Should over 50 people be less selective?
Posted: 11/19/2007 10:13:31 PM | "The problem as I see it is that society seems to think of people without a SO are failures at life."
And we would care what so called society thinks because............................
I get a real laugh at an event where there are most married couples, making a joke about never giving up being single. The reaction from the married women is great. They smile from ear to ear, and ask to hear more about my lifestyle
Maybe they are glad that I am not a threat to them, but I just think that most of them are glad to hear that if their marriage doesn't work out so well, they just might have a happy future in a single lifestyle. | |
|
| Should over 50 people be less selective?
Posted: 11/22/2007 2:38:30 PM | I've met several women on this site. (In the Dallas area to be fair). They either have very, very old pics posted and it's frightening in person, or they have totally lied about themselves on their profiles. Meaning, they're in a bind and looking for help, not a man.
That's why I changed my profile to the present wording. There are honest guys out here. But I have been totally amazed at the nerve and dis-honesty. But there's one out here. Even for me...............LOL................If she looks like her pic and is honest? And I want to meet her?(and she likes me).....................I'm in. | |
|
| Should over 50 people be less selective?
Posted: 11/23/2007 1:04:50 PM | Grace Unto You And Peace,
The implications of your primary question raises the hair on the back of my neck.
Why?
Because I am 66 years-old and have only met one woman in the last thirty years with whom I felt at home.
Now I am alone and while the pressure to be-with-someone [anyone?] is great, I look at the elements of that radiant relationship and say, "Wait a minute."
This is my reasoning:
I am an INFJ cluster of personality traits according to the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator {MBTI} which means that as a male I appear in the population at point five percent of the time {.5%}. My personality type is the most rare of the types described by Myers-Briggs.
What does this mean?
It means that if I want to be happy in the rest of my life, I should be "choosy." I should look for another INFJ or, in second place, an INFP. INFJ's in women appears at a one and a half percent incidence {1.5%}. With INFP's, the incidence is even greater, but not by much.
Those who argue that anybody can be happy with anybody fool themselves, at least as far as I am concerned.
And as far as believing that my opposite would be the best choice for me in order to be complimented or made a whole? Garbage! The figures from the Martial Counselors prove that the ones who have to go to martial therapy are the opposite type marriages or pairings.
The mistake in advancing this theory of opposites marrying in the first place was that the individuals who put this forward in the first place thought that the population as a whole was paired up in opposite types, not that those who were opposite types went to therapists to find some way of resolving the conflicts which they were having and ultimately were only able to resolve their conflicts in divorce.
Wishing to be happy, I think I will put off compulsively linking up with the first "what's it" who walks my way.
Better for my future partner to be INFJ or INFP than any Tomisina, Ricotta, or Harriet {the counterparts to "Tom" "Dick' and "Harry"}.
Agape, kiitos, shalom, Xie Xie, salaam, ja namaste,
Don as "Tauno" | |
|
| Should over 50 people be less selective?
Posted: 11/23/2007 2:50:15 PM | tcits said in message 162
Sorry I took so long to get to the point, but like I said, new at this...
I say: "You did very well. You should chime in more often"
 | |
|
| |
| |
| Should over 50 people be less selective?
Posted: 11/23/2007 5:10:46 PM | I'll settle for chicken instead of lobster thats as far as my settling instincts go...otherwise I will hold firm till the butterflies are back in my tummy tum tum.
FEELINGS ARENT RIGHT ARE WONG.....THEY JUST ARE!!!!!!!!!! | |
|
Home
login 
