Show ALL Forums
Posted In Forum:

Home   login   MyForums  
 
 Author Thread: What do Nerdy men look for in a woman?
 ravenstar66
Joined: 8/27/2007
Msg: 55 (view)
 
What do Nerdy men look for in a woman?
Posted: 8/16/2012 8:11:01 PM
I love how this devolved to a discussion on mathematics lol

awesome

The world needs more nerds.. good gracious, an intelligent conversation! someone to watch sci-fi with... someone who gets that going to comic con is fun! That D&D was a great way to spend a Sunday with friends. (original game, but only if you had a good dungeon master)

philosophy! literature! science! sociology! etc... so many subjects.. so few to share them with.

for a long time my dream guy was Dr. Daniel Jackson = just the right combination of smarts, philanthropy and absent-mindedness (yes, i realize he's a fictional character - but please, don't tell me you nerdy guys have never dreamed about 7 of 9)

There seems to be very few in my age group though... probably all locked up in labs somewhere trying to get published... *sigh*

I'll stop now.. I'm depressing myself. i have no idea how to find them much less go out with them. Sorry, can't help.
 ravenstar66
Joined: 8/27/2007
Msg: 150 (view)
 
Would you date someone 20 years older than you?
Posted: 8/16/2012 6:19:49 PM
nope 20 years is too big of a gap (entire generation)

and I'm not looking to be a nursemaid in the near future.
 ravenstar66
Joined: 8/27/2007
Msg: 14 (view)
 
What are the expectations from women of men over 40
Posted: 8/16/2012 6:09:32 PM
someone who follows their passion, and is true to themselves. their values are mature.

someone who HAS a passion(s) in life, you'd be amazed at how many older people have nothing that stirs their soul or inspires them anymore - they must have a life of their own. Preferably a full one. I've met some people who are positively DEAD, just 'waiting' for 'retirement'... boring as hell. Life is for the living.. and life doesn't happen in front of the tv.

someone who understands and accepts personal responsibility for their life.

they must be able to support themselves... I don't care about the level.. I kind of like minimalism

someone who is open-minded and up for learning and trying new things, adventurous and courageous - being able to be silly and tolerate looking foolish is essential.

someone who has finally gotten to the point of being beyond possessiveness and jealousy, clingy is a turn off. Insecurity as well.

someone who can express themselves.. say what they mean and mean what they say, reliable and honorable are good qualities too.

well-rounded, can converse on a variety of subjects.. I personally prefer men who read more than the tv guide.

someone who will appreciate and accept me as I am. I choose my own changes and personal development at this point. I don't change for others. I don't expect others to twist themselves into pretzels for me either.

someone who takes care of themselves - health is important, as is fitness. It shows me they have healthy self-esteem and it's nice if they can go hiking with me.

someone who is comfortable with their own company... can tolerate being single, or alone.. but chooses to share with others.

someone who gives back in some way to humanity/society... social responsibility and awareness.

someone who isn't looking for a woman to 'take care of him' uuugh.. I'm SO done being a mommy.

someone who appreciates that I am independent and happy in my own life... and don't really 'need' a man anymore.. want is another issue entirely.

No drama.. seriously - deal with it before you go looking for another partner. I'm not interested.

NO addictions.

After 40.. these are the things that are important (to me anyway)
 ravenstar66
Joined: 8/27/2007
Msg: 22 (view)
 
Curiosity: the search for life on a dead planet?
Posted: 8/16/2012 8:05:45 AM
@ verydrunktoo

awesome post

I am not a misanthropist, I am a realist. I am one of those who have attempted (and succeeded at least once) to make things better where i saw injustice. I paid a very high personal cost for that.. and jadedness is a very real risk.

i am all for exploration but i am also a student of humanity... the hardest lesson i have had to learn is that other people's agendas are frequently not even close to my own motivations, often they are self-serving.. even more so when you add greed, profit and corporate systems in there. Our systems are not set up to serve humanity.. they are set up to serve the elite. (and there are grumblings worldwide about this - changes are happening - but social change is akin to geological change... it happens slowly)

That's not misanthropy.. it's seeing things the way they are. We could easily solve most of the world's problems in a few short years - if we wanted to - we don't want to...(collectively) because there is little immediate profit in it. also.. we live life with the perspective of our own comfort... and most of us refuse to give up our luxuries (or even scale them back) to benefit others because we can't see beyond our own needs, beyond our own little slice of time, beyond our own backyard and we have been taught a mindset of lack - not abundance for all. however I recognize that there are a lot of people all over the world doing a lot of good things for the right reasons.. BUT those people are not the heads of big corporations and government and there is a sore lack of unity of purpose in humankind. I hope that this will change as we become more educated and socially evolved... and there are signs this is happening. The scale is the thing though - these changes take a long time.

I am excited about the rover... i love scientific discovery, especially space exploration... but i won't fool myself into believing that pure 'curiosity' is the reason for it. That would be stupid and blind - ask any psychologist, people don't do anything without a payoff, corporations even more so (NASA is funded by big corporations and the Department of Defense. Seriously? do you really think the DOD gives a rat's ass about pure scientific discovery? Or the plight of the disadvantaged, or global warming?). I do hope the data retrieved will better the state of all of humanity, and not just the privileged though.

on another note: one does not have to eshew all technology and modern advances to be a responsible citizen, or even a green citizen. Learning to balance our technology with the needs of the environment and fellow humans (animals too) is one of our greatest challenges. Going back to a stone age (or even pre-industrial) existence is not necessary to be a responsible member of the human race, or to have the right to define the problems.. where else do solutions come from if not discontent?. It's insulting to be confronted with such black and white thinking and straw man arguments because it's only purpose is to shut down and belittle others into feeling shame for their desire to be responsible while being a member of a technological society. It isn't one or the other, it's the adaptation and responsible synthesis of resources that defines the human race... and are it's noblest qualities. Shaming and criticism don't belong in productive conversation.

It isn't using a computer (or electricity) that is messing up the world... sheesh... it's the irresponsible and excessive use of those things which contribute to the problems we see. It's things like having to have the latest ipod, (or car, whatever) when the one you have works just fine - but your ego needs you to have your peers envy you, or to feel self-worth... take that thought and apply it to everything and THAT is the real problem.
 ravenstar66
Joined: 8/27/2007
Msg: 8 (view)
 
How long before (or if?) the Abrahamic faiths will disappear from Society?
Posted: 8/13/2012 8:32:54 AM
Atheism/agnosticism is not on the decline but is holding at about 11-15% of world population (1 billion) - however as Igor states it's almost impossible to really measure since 'faith' is a personal issue and there may be lots of people who live in very religious places where their atheism or agnosticism would cause them hardship. (vice versa?)

Nominal christians abound as well... they say they are christian but there's no litmus test... most I know do not attend services or perform any other public display of faith.. so who knows? I don't know enough muslims to judge their nominal rates - the ones i do know practice, on different levels - but they all observe holy days, etc... i suggest that in North America anyway, 'christians' (by this I mean devout, practicing christians) are a lot less than estimated.

Paganism (mostly neo-pagan or reconstructionist) has grown 130% since 1996..Wicca is the fastest growing of the neo-pagan religions, but Asatru is closing... if you lump in Hinduism, Sikhism, Shinto, the myriad varieties of Buddhism (not really a religion) and the various tribal religions (non-abrahamic faiths) then well over 35% of the world is pagan.

Jews are a different story - there are religious jews (observant) and jews as a 'race'. Not all jewish people follow the faith.

There is no way to come to any accurate conclusions... except that Islam is the fastest growing of the Abrahamic religions, Atheism isn't going away... and people will find ways to express their spirituality.
 ravenstar66
Joined: 8/27/2007
Msg: 39 (view)
 
Would you date a man who owes child support?
Posted: 8/12/2012 9:44:49 AM
Would I date a man who owes child support? no

would I date a man trying to avoid paying child support.. hell no. I wouldn't even date one who was resentful of supporting his children.

Would I date a man that was paying child support? Yes... but only if he was involved in his childrens' lives. I have no use for people who breed and then don't step up. sorry boys and girls.. sex has consequences - if you can't accept them - you aren't mature enough to have sex.

Personal responsibility is the litmus test of maturity, and non-negotiable.
 ravenstar66
Joined: 8/27/2007
Msg: 98 (view)
 
No spark/chemistry is women code word for I don't know what I want
Posted: 8/12/2012 9:38:15 AM
This is a weird subject... at least in my experience and maybe it does have to do with pheremones...and genetic compatibility don't know. I do know that I have male friends who are attractive - in the sense of aesthetics, but not to me.. as in I would never want to have sex with them. I'm just not attracted to them that way...and i have no control over that. I think they are great guys, sensitive, smart... all that, but no spark.

Can't make it happen either, it either is, or it isn't. The funny thing is that I will know this within an hour of talking to someone... sometimes immediately, even instantaneously (the 'spark')- even if I don't 'like' them as people and would choose not to have a sexual relationship with them... so it's more than just personality or character. It's the quality that would give me a reason to try to get to know them better if they have other qualities i like and see where the spark leads... if all else goes well.. then...

It's not a 'code'... it's a facet of human nature... and maybe women, because biologically we are supposed to be more selective, have it a little stronger.. don't know.. it's a thought.

Interesting subject... but not a 'conspiracy' or game playing - just words to describe something that is hard to define.
 ravenstar66
Joined: 8/27/2007
Msg: 14 (view)
 
Curiosity: the search for life on a dead planet?
Posted: 8/12/2012 7:35:01 AM
someone told me once that humans don't do anything without a payoff.

In life i find that to be true. Doesn't it seems a little odd that NASA would spend billions (trillions?) to send curiosity there if they didn't think there would be a payoff eventually? (since the last rovers stopped - hasn't been too long - they must have been working on curiosity for YEARS)

kk follow me here... it's government money, and probably big business as well... I highly doubt the funding would be there if there wasn't a payoff and the wealthy don't take outrageous risks, but calculated ones. sheesh.. they gave up the shuttles to private enterprise because they couldn't sustain them anymore financially, yet they can send the most expensive rover yet?

They know something... something worth billions (trillions?)... I don't buy the crap that it's just the desire for knowledge.. or exploration.. though that would be a factor. I'm not suggested any wacky conspiracy theory, just being logical. Soo.. let's use our heads. What are the main problems we have here? Resource depletion, water depletion...who does that affect financially? big business... they have sent the rover to a large crater... to dig soil/geological samples.. umm.. could they be searching for natural resources/water? (Mars is rich in iron, it's a big rustball - i know that much - any geologists know what occurs with iron?)

Colonization of Mars is not possible at this time (ever?)... that's a whole set of technology we don't have yet and i won't even hazard what living on a planet with 60% of earths gravity and a TON of solar radiation and no magnetosphere would do to us long term... but, geological resources could be mined robotically... water can be converted to oxygen and hydrogen rather easily...water itself could be shipped to earth once the problem of getting it off the planet is solved, once in space weight really doesn't matter and propulsion science is something that is growing in leaps and bounds - so energy may not be much of a concern in the near future. Plus since it is a 'dead' planet - nuclear energy is not a concern... I'm no scientist but even i can see that Mars looks like a great big mine... no one there to challenge it either and if it is a 'dead' planet who cares about pollution?

Finding life would be important too... not so much because of itself, but because of the risk of bringing back alien biology that could wipe us out, or worse (we are more microbe than human..what would an alien microbe do to us?).

It would be nice to think that this mission is about our higher instincts for understanding.. I'm not buying it though. Science depends on funding from other sectors.. and those sectors have agendas. I would propose that those agendas are self-serving. Yes, i am a cynic.

Sooooooo... who would Mars belong to for mining rights?
 ravenstar66
Joined: 8/27/2007
Msg: 2 (view)
 
How long before (or if?) the Abrahamic faiths will disappear from Society?
Posted: 8/12/2012 7:00:38 AM
Tough question...

I am of the belief (through observation) that art (literature, movies, etc...) are prophetic, in that we as a species imagine - then create/discover.. Take Jules Verne - or even Leonardo Da Vinci.. both visionaries.. and a lot of what they imagined has come true. Maybe not in the details but still...

I think that there will always be 'religion' only because the human psyche seems to need it (some anyway) There are those who seem terrified, to me, to contemplate a universe that basically relegates them to insignificance and those who are terrified to contemplate a universe where they ARE significant. I am sure someone somewhere has done a study and published on this subject. it's about meaning ultimately... and meaning is approached differently by those who are religiously inclined and those with a more humanistic or scientific view. weirdly the goal is the same - to find meaning and understanding of one's place in the universe. so I propose that religion will disappear about the same time the search for meaning does.. which would render us non-human. It's the curse of sentience... to need meaning and be able to place ourselves psychologically in some sort of order. The lack of this psychological security is called insanity.

Back to the visionaries; The realities that are envisioned now are expansive, and point towards artificial intelligence (which would really put a kink in the old 'humans are uniquely created' idea), alien life (ditto), evolution of 'super-humans' (telepathic, telekinetic, or other para-ability, etc..) that would change paradigms in the species self-concept. However.. we are creative, I think 'religion' will adapt to encompass those changes. the Catholic church has already amended it's canons to include extraterrestrial life as part of the 'creation'. Many churches have changed their doctrines to encompass homosexuals - the evolution of religion to reflect societies morals and concepts has already begun.

The Abrahamic religions are based on the need for order... external control of our baser instincts, usually symbolized by a cosmic 'father figure', punitive and rigid, very black or white thinking. So until we can evolve to the point where this psychological need for inner control by the projection of a celestial father figure to curb our less social instincts.. there will be those who cling to it. I say that because of a weird thought I found among some religious people - that 'without god' why would we be moral? I find the concept strange - I have no need to fear retribution to make moral choices - but obviously this is not the case for some. So in a way... maybe it's a good thing that these people who have little inner control have this external restraint called religion. The LITERAL belief in the Abrahamic religions will fade with education and evolution... how long? Who knows? The roots of religion go back to pre-history, probably as far back as the first glimmer of self-awareness. Don't look for it soon.

I do believe though that as we evolve socially many people are choosing not to cling to religions.. atheism and agnosticism are on the rise.. as are reconstructions of 'religious systems' that better serve the emotional and spiritual needs of people and are less based in blind faith.(I am a neo-pagan, I chose this because I need to feel a connection with my environment and the systems/awareness of natural cycles it uses help me in that... do I really believe there is a anthropomorphic goddess in the sky or earth? no) Religion plays a larger role than just a belief in a sky daddy... faith, hope, social needs, organization, acceptance in the 'group'.. a sense of belonging... again, order from the chaos of life. Humanism is no different, just more logical.. but it serves the same purpose.

I also see a convergence between science and religion happening... like stated before - they are actually just different methods towards the same goal.. understanding our place in the universe and finding meaning. Quantum physics seems like magic to most... and I suspect that as we increase our understanding those lines will blur... might be interesting to see what our creative little minds can cook up then.

as I contemplate these things I find it ironic that religion and science are seen as opposites... because they really are two sides of the same coin. One approaches from the heart... and one approaches from the mind... someday, if we survive that long, they will meet. I believe that will be the moment of our initiation to true psychological maturity as a species.
 ravenstar66
Joined: 8/27/2007
Msg: 6 (view)
 
Is Time A Noumenon Or A Phenomenon?
Posted: 8/12/2012 6:19:14 AM
From what I understand time is a measure of motion/events in space.. and that's all. Because of our finite perspective we see it as linear.
But we all know our senses only give us a slice of 'reality', we are woefully blind to a lot... technology has given us the ability to perceive quite a bit beyond our senses but to assume that we are aware of everything is just human ego.

can I express this scientifically? no... but that's the gist of it. Same as gravity isn't a 'force' but warps and curves in space created by mass.

Someone once asked what 'happened' before the big bang... I said 'nothing' because the concept of 'before' didn't exist before the 'motion' and mass created by the big bang.

It's a mind-boggling idea.. very hard to wrap one's brain around. Like the fact that the faster you move the slower time appears (Einstein) theoretically if you could travel faster than light (or speed of light?) time would appear to stop.. would it even reverse? I don't know.

So time and space are aspects of the same phenomena.. without outward motion of mass (expanding universe) there would be no space, or time.

So, I have to ask, without mass can space and time exist at all?

so many questions that hurt the head LOL
 Ravenstar66
Joined: 8/27/2007
Msg: 77 (view)
 
If a person initiates contact with you on POF, do you expect for them to have read your profile?
Posted: 8/11/2012 6:18:43 AM
YES.. and if they didn't I write them off

I have no time for anyone who isn't interested in who I am.
 Ravenstar66
Joined: 8/27/2007
Msg: 45 (view)
 
What 2 look 4 when u r over 45...
Posted: 8/11/2012 6:13:09 AM
Decent English skills?
 Ravenstar66
Joined: 8/27/2007
Msg: 403 (view)
 
Evolution vs Creationism/Intelligent Design
Posted: 2/15/2012 5:20:41 AM
^^^ I love this

every time I see.. love it all over again

BEST rebuttal to anyone who picks and chooses the scripture to 'follow'.
 Ravenstar66
Joined: 8/27/2007
Msg: 110 (view)
 
Why men run at the first sign of pregnancy?
Posted: 2/14/2012 9:37:41 PM
I don't agree with anyone shirking their responsibilities.. and if you choose to have sex - there's always the chance that pregnancy will occur. That's BIOLOGY.. and a risk everyone takes, EVERY TIME, birth control or no - and should own up to. Or get a vasectomy, tie your tubes, whatever it takes if you can't face the music.

BUT... when I found out I was pregnant... hell, I wanted to run..
unfortunately you can't get away from your own womb.... :(

Scared shitless.

But I dealt with it, owned my responsibility and now have a beautiful daughter I wouldn't trade for anything. Parenthood has been a blessing in my life.
 Ravenstar66
Joined: 8/27/2007
Msg: 14 (view)
 
A question for the ladies............
Posted: 2/14/2012 9:02:37 PM
wow, I need to hire her as a personal assistant
I'm lucky if I remember my dentist appointment

Dating is playing the field - that's the definition, until the 'one' comes along (in most cases)

I couldn't do it but I'm organizationally challenged - it's the flaky artist in me

don't have anything bad to say about it though
 Ravenstar66
Joined: 8/27/2007
Msg: 2 (view)
 
Why did you get divorced?
Posted: 2/14/2012 8:57:38 PM
Do you really want to know? There are as many answers as their are divorced people. In my case it was because he changed so completely after we got married that it wasn't the same person I had LIVED WITH for 5 years before.

All of a sudden he was possessive, controlling and jealous for no reason and our friendship was over - and we were best buds for all the time we were together before.

Baffling.. and unacceptable.

We could have grown as individuals and as a couple, but he made that impossible...and that is of the utmost importance - that your bring out the best in each other, support one another and have each others backs, on most days anyway.

Soul death or stagnation is as bad as being punched in the face...

buh-bye
 Ravenstar66
Joined: 8/27/2007
Msg: 5 (view)
 
Would you tell the whole truth to the right man?
Posted: 2/14/2012 8:50:19 PM
^^^^^^ hahahahahahahahahaha good answer

Depends on the person I guess. For me it would be when I felt that he was trustworthy enough. (as in he would never use that against me) My concept of a relationship is one of best friends first, companions, compadres - if I couldn't be completely honest at some point, about anything, then it isn't the right place for me to be.

Some people compartmentalize their lives - to each their own.
 Ravenstar66
Joined: 8/27/2007
Msg: 160 (view)
 
What is evil?
Posted: 2/14/2012 8:10:30 PM
hmmm... I don't think the diabolical plan for human termination via 'planned parenthood' has worked out well... considering we just went over the 7 BILLION mark. BILLION.... human population is a friggin' fractal at this point

Nice plan there...must be the same people we have running our countries, the effect is similar (snark)
 Ravenstar66
Joined: 8/27/2007
Msg: 103 (view)
 
Mankind's True Purpose
Posted: 2/14/2012 1:19:42 PM
There is only one way to justify a statement like that... as ALL humans share the same genetic code (with the exception of those who did not inherit neanderthal genes.. even then)

- It would mean 'inhuman' on a spiritual or 'energetic' level and has no basis in science whatsoever. Science has never found one human being that differs genetically to the point of not being Homo Sapiens.

There's some lines in Genesis (forget where) that talk about the 'children of god' and others.. I think referred to as sheep and goats. Wish I could cite it.

This kind of thinking is elitist at best
 Ravenstar66
Joined: 8/27/2007
Msg: 101 (view)
 
Mankind's True Purpose
Posted: 2/14/2012 1:13:40 PM
Wait a minute.. ants manipulate their environment...they build climate controlled habitats (so do termites), some farm, some keep 'domestic animals'.. they build cities with organized sections for different purposes, some are slavers, some wage wars of territory, and they have been here a whole lot longer than humans... they aren't what we would consider sentient - especially individually...

Manipulation of our environment is not a purely human achievement.

We are not as unique as we would like to believe.
 ravenstar66
Joined: 8/27/2007
Msg: 301 (view)
 
megalithic construction
Posted: 2/13/2012 10:07:49 AM
Gwen,
Not dreaming..(unless you and I have the same dreams!) I saw a program on that, either Discovery or PBS.. might have been a Nature episode

It was really really cool... I think it was a salt flat... it might even have been on Mythbusters, I don't remember.

Fred.. will check out Diamond, Thanks!
 Ravenstar66
Joined: 8/27/2007
Msg: 299 (view)
 
megalithic construction
Posted: 2/13/2012 6:06:13 AM
Thorondor

So nice to hear from someone in the field.. thank you. Your posts are informative and enlightening.

I would like to see archaeology look into the engineering aspects of megalithic construction a little deeper and understand there are so many facets to study along with the fact that putting the pieces together on just what remains is a challenge in itself. But I am as fascinated by many aspects of ancient cultures as well. I am aware that the South Americans were highly sophisticated at a very early time, even without the wheel - the Spanish made quick work of wiping that out - but the clues are there. Their mathematics alone are a testament to their cleverness. It's too bad most of their writing was destroyed.

Domestication of certain foods is also a fascinating topic - wheat is one in particular... as are bananas and maize.

l still am interested in the physics of these accomplishments and hope to see more investigation into it.
 ravenstar66
Joined: 8/27/2007
Msg: 287 (view)
 
megalithic construction
Posted: 2/10/2012 1:51:41 PM
Read the thread.. I've posted various instances

Like moving a 50 ton block.. with natural fiber rope? we can only just barely move a 100 tons with a specially made crane and steel cables

Moving multi-ton stones UP A MOUNTAIN side.. without wheels, pulleys or other modern equipment (South America - Mayan/Aztec)

Cutting jigsaw-like pieces of stone to fit perfectly... with stone tools

Building the pyramids in 20 years.. something like a stone every 6 seconds
 ravenstar66
Joined: 8/27/2007
Msg: 286 (view)
 
megalithic construction
Posted: 2/10/2012 12:56:10 PM
Fred.. there are some issues with the physics that haven't been explained by engineers or physicists in a lot of the cases.

That's what the original question was... trying to answer some of these questions. Saying "aliens did it' or some such is as bad as saying 'goddidit' for abiogenesis - in my opinion, although keeping an open mind is always a good idea.

I'm a curious cat and am baffled by some of these feats, as in some cases they are beyond our abilities even today with modern machinery, computers, etc... much less with copper or stone tools and muscle power.

I find it interesting that by asking these questions some people seem to assume that a far out hypothesis (such as aliens) is the first thing on the table. I'm not that easily satisfied. I'd actually like to see an explanation that involves actual science.

:)

Peace
 ravenstar66
Joined: 8/27/2007
Msg: 285 (view)
 
megalithic construction
Posted: 2/10/2012 9:01:10 AM
It probably doesn't help that the Library at Alexandria was destroyed either... good pointS!
 ravenstar66
Joined: 8/27/2007
Msg: 72 (view)
 
Mankind's True Purpose
Posted: 2/10/2012 8:56:45 AM
Another thing I've always wondered about ^^^

The Morning Star thing.. makes me think about the concept of Janus

And from what I read... Satan always did what God asked of him.. ie: Job

Interesting stuff
 ravenstar66
Joined: 8/27/2007
Msg: 49 (view)
 
Evil does?Evil do...an Evil done....;)
Posted: 2/10/2012 8:48:46 AM
Scott M. Pecks 'People of the Lie' describes malignant narcissists or on the extreme end of the scale, sociopaths, (or anti-social personality disorder, ASPD - used to be termed psychopaths) those who don't have the capacity to feel empathy, and derive pleasure from using others for their own self gratification or ego needs. It is being suspected now that they are born that way - they lack something that gives them the ability to empathize. Their brain patterns are different from others and a genetic component is being researched. I've done a lot of study into this.. Snakes in Suits is a good book on this as well. They aren't as rare as people would believe making up some 4% of the population. Some are more harmful than others, but most would be catagorized as 'evil' for their complete lack of moral restraint or compassion for others. Unfortunately many of them are very clever at coming across as 'normal' they aren''t motivated to be 'good', but they want to look like they are. Also the more clever ones seem to thrive in the corporate or political world where their lack of empathy gives them an edge in competing with others for positions of power and prestige.

The larger number of them are functional and follow the rules of society to 'blend in' - self preservation being their sole motive - most people have come across them, either in their own social circle, family or work environment. Sociopaths are, however, dangerous and frequently leave a wake of human destruction behind them, emotionally, financially and in other ways. Scott M. Peck's observation that they are, at heart, extremely petty and even boring is interesting, their inner lives are hollow and they are incapable of truly original thought or innovation. They mimic the emotional responses of those around them as a way to disarm others.

"Evil" can be quite culture based.. today we would consider anyone who kept slaves as doing evil, but not that long ago this was considered normal around the world and in most cultures. Child labour and , the subjugation and abuse of women, the selling of daughters into marriage, racism... infanticide, euthanasia, sex outside of very proscribed areas, blood sacrifice, child sacrifice.. the abuse and sacrifice of animals - all of these things would horrify most of us today yet were fairly commonplace not that long ago. Think the inquisition, the witch hunts, genocide of whole races, sweatshops... let's not even get into war... which is evil on a large scale. If all people were not a little bit 'evil' (ie: self serving) everyone in the world would have medical care, education and enough food to live - but that's not the case now is it?

It also changes from person to person.. some still think homosexuals are evil (which is absurd - but that's my view, not everyone's, unfortunately) Some believe that caucasians are superior to other races and would be very insulted if you called them 'evil'. A lot of the worlds people consider western culture as evil. Then there are the people who consider anyone who isn't in their particular religion 'evil'. These are not isolated things, it's pretty widespread still.

The issue is that other than cases of true psychopathy..(and who knows what they think) no one thinks they are evil.. the human mind is amazing at rationalizing just about anything. Even those whose actions regular people would call evil think they are doing the right thing... or they couldn't do it - that's the way the mind works. Everyone does this..

It's hard to understand why people do some awful things..and it's easy to blame some outside 'force' for it but just like we have intellectual geniuses or talented athletes amongst the more average of us we also have those who are socially or emotionally bankrupt. It's a variation of humanity.. thankfully it isn't the majority because sociopathic behavior not a sustainable social thing.... and morals (subjective as they are) are those things that preserve the species by encouraging empathy and cooperation. We are social animals and won't survive as a species for long if the social fabric is unravelled on a large scale.

In the case of malignant narcissists or sociopaths - they just don't care, they can't care, it isn't part of their make-up.. and as a society we must take measures to protect the rest from them. They didn't choose to be this way though. They are the predators of the human species and in some ways we encourage them.. we reward the cutthroat tactics of our politicians and financial leaders.. we even glorify them in our entertainment.

It's a huge and complicated subject..
 ravenstar66
Joined: 8/27/2007
Msg: 236 (view)
 
Celibacy - a more common choice than people admit?
Posted: 2/10/2012 4:51:05 AM
This thread is a breath of fresh air. I've been celibate, or abstinent for a few years now - something I probably wouldn't have done when I was younger. Finding a 'relationship' seemed to be higher on my priority list... and being sexually active as well. It hasn't been a conscious choice really, I just came to a point where I'm pickier about relationships and I don't mind being alone - AND I'm no longer interested in anything casual.

If and when the right person comes along - that's a different story. I have a high libido and in the context of being with someone I admire and feel comfortable with...

I do find that I am judged though... like singlehood is unnatural or there is something wrong with me for not being in a relationship or hooking up with every date, i don't know. Many people can't comprehend that one can be happy outside of a relationship - but I am, and that makes it easier to be selective.. it's a want, not a need.

I have no 'moral' grounds for abstinence, it is just the choice that fits where I am at in life right now. Maybe I just want more than the physical side. Opportunity isn't the issue either. This thread has given me things to think about... I also admire those men who have posted who know themselves well enough to have made this a conscious choice... gives me hope because one thing I would be looking for is someone self aware.

Peace
 Ravenstar66
Joined: 8/27/2007
Msg: 62 (view)
 
Mankind's True Purpose
Posted: 2/9/2012 5:13:08 PM
That's a very good question... why WOULD a phrase which describes a beginning and an end be used for a deity that is supposedly infinite?
 ravenstar66
Joined: 8/27/2007
Msg: 386 (view)
 
Evolution vs Creationism/Intelligent Design
Posted: 2/9/2012 2:10:35 PM
^^^ this!^^^^

Gotta wonder what these degrees actually consist of, especially when you get into PHD's.. isn't original thought kind of expected in a doctoral thesis?
 ravenstar66
Joined: 8/27/2007
Msg: 60 (view)
 
Musical taste being a dealbreaker?
Posted: 2/9/2012 1:31:59 PM
Yes.. it's a deal breaker

There are certain kinds of music that go with certain mindsets.. especially I have found with those who are absolutely stuck on one certain kind of music (country comes to mind as an example - and gangsta rap) Music is culture.. like literature or art. A persons musical taste and repertoire is very indicative of who they are among other things. But I'm an audiophile.. so it could just be me

For me, anyone who has never explored music beyond what is fed to them by radio, especially top 40 stuff is too umm... average, boring, unadventurous for me. Even in classic rock some of the best stuff never, or rarely, made it to the airwaves. Most of the finest music has been completely ignored by top 40 charts and radio (except some college radio).

there is also the fact that there is music I can not bear to be around - anything auto-tuned is a beginning point, I can't stand country... corp rock - like Nickelback and Coldplay.. horrid, rap in most cases, hip hop, in most cases... classic rock that is so overplayed it's become a caricature of itself. I have wide musical tastes from Mozart's piano concertos to alternative metal and industrial to ragtime and blues to post punk, celtic to avante garde and art rock... punk.. very wide tastes.

But I think the coolest thing is when someone can turn me on to a new artist.. something I haven't heard before but is fabulous.. (or I can share mine with them) and I love live music, so yes music is a big part of compatibility - especially if you are sharing air space.
 ravenstar66
Joined: 8/27/2007
Msg: 60 (view)
 
Mankind's True Purpose
Posted: 2/9/2012 12:19:23 PM
hmm.. 'beginning' presupposes that there was a time before the universe existed but that is not possible..(even 'before' is a false concept)

The expansion of the universe, or 'big bang' was the 'beginning' of time, as we know it - there is no 'before'. I wish I could explain this as well as I've had it explained to me. Without energy and matter there can be no time as time is an aspect of space. Space is the fabric, or events between things.. time is energy/matter in motion or something akin to that. (spacetime)

No space = no time. No before.

The big bang wasn't a point in space that exploded, space didn't exist - it was a singularity that expanded to become our universe.

"Singularity" - as best as I can conceive of it it a point (cusp?) of pure probability - sheer mathematical possibility - nothing more. (biblical language: without form and void)

So no.. nothing was there before - not even time, because 'before' is a moot concept, therefore nothing was there to create the beginning. There may come a 'big crunch' which just means the ancients were more accurate about things than we are when they describe the world or universe as an ouroboros..spiral or egg - no beginning and no end - just cycles. (Or in biblical terms: alpha and omega. Am, was and always will be.)

I like the idea that the universe is god experiencing itself through 'creation'. It's as close as I can come to a 'god' concept.. and it makes far more sense to me that most other explanations.
 ravenstar66
Joined: 8/27/2007
Msg: 403 (view)
 
Guys don't want to be just friends, but girls do, why is that?
Posted: 2/9/2012 11:59:37 AM
*I don't think healthy, sane men have a problem with that. Most of us don't try to date (euphemism) every female we encounter, nor are most of us attracted to every female we come across. I just don't think we have time to be actual "friends" with every woman we find attractive who chose not to date us.
Free time is limited, and for me, I barely have time to hang out with my male friends...card games are planned in advance...who's watching the kids, etc.... and there's no ego blow or sexual tension involved there.
Now, don't get me wrong....there are reasons I ENJOY my platonic female friendships. They tend to be more open and honest. There's no competition...as we aren't trying to impress each other. We can be ourselves without judgement or risk, and let our guards down. I show them love and they love me back.
I really get why women like platonic male friendships, too. It's positive, male attention and affection they don't have to be related to or trade sex for. I get it. But I believe with the time constraints of life, you can only have so many "true" friends. Not Facebook "see-'em-twice-a-year" friends, but people you actually spend time with.*

True.. time is limited.. and true friendships deserve more than an infrequent text message. I am just shocked by the amount of people who seem to only value the other gender as a sexual object and not a human being first. I guess that's where that comes from.
 ravenstar66
Joined: 8/27/2007
Msg: 38 (view)
 
Dont you just hate it when you Meet a nice man but there's no chemistry,
Posted: 2/9/2012 11:12:32 AM
I'd give it more than one date - but be honest with him that you aren't sure but would like to spend a little more time together and see if it goes anywhere - if anything you get to spend time with someone who's company you enjoy.

unless.. you are repelled by him physically. There's attraction that's sudden - then there's attraction that grows on you. Every man I have had a relationship with hasn't been a Brad Pitt look alike, but there was something about them that I found attractive, not necessarily the first time we spent time together though.

That works both ways though - sometimes there's just something that isn't attractive and there's no getting over it.

I have experienced dating someone that I though was a fabulous person and had a lot in common with, etc... but no attraction sexually was ever going to happen... and yes, it sucks.
 ravenstar66
Joined: 8/27/2007
Msg: 47 (view)
 
How important are common interests?
Posted: 2/9/2012 10:49:56 AM
I don't see the point of having a relationship without some very basic areas of commonality.

A relationship is first and foremost a friendship, a companionship. That said you don't want to date your twin either. Time spent away from each other doing one's own thing is essential as well.

Values and ethics and lifestyle - without common ground in this area - forget it. Example: a rural baptist militant eugenist and an urban liberal hipster aren't going to last too long - unless one of them, or both, are pathologically codependent.

Having someone whom you could converse with on topics that means something to you would be important.. maybe not the very specific ones (such as in my career which has a lot of jargon, it may be difficult for someone with no experience in it to converse on it, but at least an appreciation and some interest in what I do seems desirable - my career is more than a 'job' to me - of course this is vice versa) [Abelion - Quantum theory - yes I would, though you would have to bring me up to speed on basic concepts - or point me to where I could learn about them)

Some may not agree but a similar philosophical/spiritual or political leaning would be helpful to a relationship. These things are important to me and if I couldn't share that with my partner it would be a seriously impoverished relationship.

Intellectual level - I would think finding someone who is close to one's intellectual level is important - otherwise there is an imbalance in the power structure in the relationship. Not to mention boredom and resentment at some point.

however - no-one needs to share ALL their interests with their partner (is that even possible?)- that too is a formula for stagnation.

I guess if someones motivation in having a 'relationship' is to secure a steady sexual outlet - then it doesn't really matter. Frankly that creeps me out and seems dishonest to me - that is a glorified FWB, with control issues. If however, the motivation is to have a companion on the road of life then it really does matter. Maybe I look at it differently because I'm done raising (almost) a family - now it's about the grown-ups.



Just my opinion.
 ravenstar66
Joined: 8/27/2007
Msg: 83 (view)
 
Lack of emotion; sign of a problem?
Posted: 2/9/2012 10:04:19 AM
Disagree

If he can't feel anything with the women he is dating there could be some defense mechanisms getting in the way

(we all protect ourselves - sometimes consciously, sometimes not) Self knowledge can't hurt.
 ravenstar66
Joined: 8/27/2007
Msg: 18 (view)
 
Help with understanding Black Holes
Posted: 2/9/2012 10:00:04 AM
Really? ^^^^

awesome
 ravenstar66
Joined: 8/27/2007
Msg: 17 (view)
 
Help with understanding Black Holes
Posted: 2/9/2012 9:21:03 AM
I'd like to add that there are theories that because of the strange physics that are possible within a black hole that some have postulated that they could be portals to other universes or dimension.. or even be other dimensions. Then you get into probabilities that are probably more easily explained in quantum theory.

I guess the question there would be... is mass something that can only exist with our 3 (plus time) dimensional space? What would mass look like or act like with different laws? Stuff like that... It gets a little brain twisting, for me anyway, when I try to imagine something outside of our laws of physics

cool stuff anyway... I hope I make sense - I have NO background in any of this, but find it very interesting
 ravenstar66
Joined: 8/27/2007
Msg: 16 (view)
 
Help with understanding Black Holes
Posted: 2/9/2012 9:15:56 AM
Laymans version

An incredibly dense collection of matter (theorized to be a massive star that has collapsed on itself and continues to do so because of the mass) - so heavy and dense that it's gravitational field does not allow even light to escape it.

It's therefore black, because there is no reflection possible - light goes in, doesn't come out. (Black is the absense of light - not an actual colour) I believe it has been suspected that some form(s) of radiation do escape and there are experiments/tests being designed now to try to measure this. I just read about this the other day but can't remember where so.. sorry can't cite it. Might have been Science Daily or some mag like that.

What the physical properties are inside a black hole is a crapshoot - it is believed that at that concentration of gravity (which isn't like a magnet - it's actually a warping of spacetime) the laws of physics as we know them break down. According to the Einsteins theory of relativity the gravitation pull of a black hole should actually warp time in it's area of influence - ie: time will slow down the closer you get to a black hole...

Just to play with people's minds I understand this to be that if you could 'experience' falling into a black hole (taking out the being ripped apart atom by atom part) it would start by time slowing down to the point where the experience would be infinite. You would experience falling 'forever'.

Supposedly they come in various sized from several miles across to something MUCH larger (another theory is that at the center of galaxies is a massive black hole) I can't tell you how large that could be - maybe an astrophysicist can?

No one has seen a black hole directly - but their affects on bodies close to them have been observed.

I hope this is helpful to others like myself who have NO mathematical or astronomical background.

 ravenstar66
Joined: 8/27/2007
Msg: 20 (view)
 
Whats changed?
Posted: 2/9/2012 8:06:56 AM
*Or maybe it is like a fishing pond, and it's just that you've fished your local puddle out of all the ones you were after, and the ones left are too cagey to get caught.*

^^^^ love this! lol It's just logical enough to be true
 ravenstar66
Joined: 8/27/2007
Msg: 40 (view)
 
Almost 50,salt and pepper hair, wrinkles.Passed my best!
Posted: 2/9/2012 8:04:42 AM
Take care of your health! Men usually age better, but women live longer... no woman wants to end up being a nursemaid in a few years.

The one thing I am finding is that a lot of older men (not all) can't keep up... they don't do much physically anymore and I'm very young at heart.. they've let themselves 'get old'.. and that, my friend, is a mindset. Try something new - something that scares you, or you always wanted to do but never got around to. Playfulness, curiosity and a desire to keep learning is very attractive at any age.. at ours - even more so..

Grey doesn't bother me (a bad dye job might make me laugh though)- a pot gut does. Take care of your skin, exfoliate and use a sunscreen - makes a world of difference. Dress in a way that is clean and flattering.

The advantage us older people have is that (optimally) we have wit, experience and should be fairly interesting on more than just a physical level.

Just some ideas.. good luck
 ravenstar66
Joined: 8/27/2007
Msg: 322 (view)
 
Do women have to many options?
Posted: 2/9/2012 7:52:48 AM
Back on topic

*I've been online dateing for about 2yrs now.I've dated several women some a couple months or so.Everything can be going great we have a great time talking always have a great time when were with each other.But if theres any kind of conflict or if I say im not happy about something thats it.There always seems to be more take than give.Is it I just keep finding selfish women or is it just easier to just move on than make an effort?It just seems in my experiances most women want to be happy as long as they have to make minamal effort.*

^^^What I'm hearing is that we should not be able to choose - we should just have to stay put no matter what our likes or dislikes are or how compatible we are and the entire problem in your love life is that woman are no longer bought and owned with no options but to put up with a jackass and be miserable? Your post here sounds like you are only looking at things from one perspective - yours. I highly doubt that every woman you date is a taker (unless you are only attracted to that type).

Seriously? If someone says they aren't happy with something in me (personality-wise, appearance, whatever) they can just move right along - because you don't get with someone and then whine and expect them to change. Saying that the problem with this is because there are too many options is like saying we should be with you BY DEFAULT - because there is no where else to go.. nice. So... your perfect world would have you surrounded by women you are attracted to.. and no other men, or ability to choose to be alone (or lesbian, obviously)? hahahahahahahahahahaha

Doesn't that creep anyone else out?

This has nothing to do with the way mates are selected by humans (supply and demand people - if you give away your power - oh well) or selfishness (though that is always a possibility) and everything to do with whining because the women you are dating are not accepting your demands that they alter themselves to your liking. (shocking! lol)

EVERYONE has choices - whether you choose to see them or not. We can choose to be with someone, or not. We can choose to be single. We can choose to approach someone, or not. We can choose whom to date and whom we don't want to, if there is mutual attraction - this isn't a gender thing - it's a self value thing. We can choose to see things in a way that disempowers ourselves, or not.
 ravenstar66
Joined: 8/27/2007
Msg: 10 (view)
 
Not into watching sports??
Posted: 2/9/2012 7:30:55 AM
Personally, I think most of them are lying.

I've been a woman all my life ;p and have had many women friends - very few of them could give a rats ass about sports (watching - not playing) Never have I gone to a friends house and seen sports on on their tv, or been asked to come over and view a game... not in 45 years. Never have I sat around with women, not at a club, pub, restaurant, or even work and had a conversation about sports.

I like to watch martial arts, sometimes the Olympics, or boxing - maybe the odd playoff hockey game - but it's far from being a part of my regular routine.

Some may indeed like watching sports - but most? Bull.

My gut tells me it's something they say to be more 'user friendly' with men.



It's funny
 ravenstar66
Joined: 8/27/2007
Msg: 81 (view)
 
Lack of emotion; sign of a problem?
Posted: 2/9/2012 7:18:43 AM
Flat 'affect' (look it up) IS a mental health issue. It can be caused by various issues... medical problems, hormonal problems, SAD, depression.... psychological defense mechanisms (which are not conscious) etc...

I don't know why you would be against finding some sort of answer for this?... therapy, or even a good check-up and diagnoses, is the smart thing to do - flat affect can take so much joy out of life that one can become suicidal after time. OR you could develop an addiction to a substance and or person as a way to self-medicate. We are optimally supposed to have certain chemicals in our brains.. dopamine, serotonin - that make us 'feel'.. it's natures way of motivating us and keeping us healthy.

You don't get happiness (or emotion) from another person - but you can experience it with another. Expecting to meet the 'right one' that will fire up your feel good chemicals in your brain is stupid and it's also expecting an awful lot out of another person, frankly it's self-serving and selfish..

Seriously, suck it up and accept that there may be a bigger issue here - get a medical evaluation and take responsibility for yourself.
 ravenstar66
Joined: 8/27/2007
Msg: 397 (view)
 
Guys don't want to be just friends, but girls do, why is that?
Posted: 2/9/2012 7:05:09 AM
This thread is such a sad commentary on the state of gender relations...

Maybe I'm misunderstanding the OP question... IDK

Being friends with the opposite sex shouldn't even be an issue - we all come in contact with numerous people of both genders (and orientations) every day. They are people first - men or women after. They have qualities we either like or don't.. intelligence, humour, values, interests...etc.. I don't know about anyone else but I choose friends for those things first and gender isn't an issue in my friendships. There have been many many threads about attraction - what it is, how it works and the fact that we aren't sexually attracted to everyone we meet. There's been TONS of whining from those who can't grasp the concept that someone may not be attracted sexually to them. (seriously - get over it, it's just the way it is) Ask yourself this: Are you sexually attracted to every person of the gender you are normally attracted to that you come across? If you say yes - there's something wrong there.

Sometimes a relationship isn't possible with a particular person.. the reasons are myriad - different interests, different lifestyles, maybe even a few character attributes that just don't mesh - so even when there is the possibility of sexual attraction it just isn't enough to overcome other issues - doesn't mean one has to discard the person entirely.

Example, I have an ex whom I'm still highly attracted to but the 'relationship' part didn't work for several reasons, we are still friends - because we like each other as PEOPLE.. as a couple, not so much - we don't bring out the best in one another in that way. We have a lot in common though in other areas, we are in the same career field and though we don't hang out often - he is still someone I can talk to and share things with. He's currently involved with someone and I'm HAPPY for him. He is a friend I value quite highly.

Now.. if the OP means what does it mean when a dating situation is stopped by the "I just want to be friends" thing. That's a different thing altogether - that is a cowardly way for someone to let him down gently. It has a different tone than, "I think we would be great friends, but because of ________ a relationship between us is not possible, how do you feel about it?". It all comes down to honesty and the guts to be clear and respectful.

I've also come across this in my life.. as in I've been dating someone and they can't understand that I can have friends of either gender and they get all jealous and suspicious - they have dirty minds and no ethics, it's obvious that they are not capable of seeing people as people first and project that on others. I kick them to the curb - I have no time for small minded insecure people.

I truly hope that those who haven't yet created and maintained friendships with people of both sexes at least try - true friends are rare, a gift in ones life. You are missing out on one of the most wonderful things one can experience.
 Ravenstar66
Joined: 8/27/2007
Msg: 6 (view)
 
Synchronicity?
Posted: 2/9/2012 6:27:36 AM
This is an idea I have struggled with... logically it doesn't make any sense, yet I have experienced it in my own life. Having just the right person, idea or book.. something, show up at the very time it's most needed. Now, whether it's just a matter of coincidence and interpretation of events or an actual phenomena - I don't know

It's like inventions that are 'discovered' at the same time in different parts of the world by people who don't know one another... can't think of an example off hand but I have come across this in my reading. If I can remember one I'll post it.

It's one of those things that doesn't yet have a solid answer I think.
 Ravenstar66
Joined: 8/27/2007
Msg: 5 (view)
 
Seventh Day Adventist
Posted: 2/9/2012 4:57:09 AM
In general:

SDA's follow the bible as literally as possible while admitting that some of the Levitican laws are cultural and do not apply (ie: slavery and the treatment of slaves, fabric laws, etc..). They do missionary work around the world, Their sabbath is friday eve to saturday eve, They don't eat pork or shellfish... they prefer to be 'equally yoked', they don't remarry if they are divorced...ever.

I went to one SDA church for a while in my youth and the ones I met were very nice people and I could see they were actually doing their best to practice their beliefs - but I couldn't say that about all SDA's because I haven't met them.

I wasn't investigating them on their dating or courting beliefs but it's safe to say that sex before (or after, or outside of) marriage is a no-no. They are a little elitist - kind of like JW's and you probably wouldn't find one on POF.
 Ravenstar66
Joined: 8/27/2007
Msg: 54 (view)
 
Mankind's True Purpose
Posted: 2/9/2012 4:45:59 AM
*Actually the Olduvai handaxe is proof that people that processed traits like ability to think, build and be creative showed that being strong was not the only thing that mattered.*

^^^Agreed - innovation was a huge factor but wouldn't get you far if you didn't have the physical endurance to live long enough to create something. I suggest that a large percentage of the population couldn't survive more than a year without modern conveniences.. fortitude is less needed in the modern world.
 Ravenstar66
Joined: 8/27/2007
Msg: 30 (view)
 
Is This Planet A Success?
Posted: 2/8/2012 2:09:44 PM
This planet is approx. 4 billion years old... many life forms on it have come and gone.. and it's pretty risk free to say that many more will do the same...

The sun has.. idk.. 10 billion years I think before it goes to red giant phase then shrinks to a dwarf... frying then freezing this little ball of iron, nickel and carbon.. but it will still orbit the little dwarf sun as a planet I believe.

It's doing fine... it's being a planet

how would it fail as a planet? not coalescing in the first place would count, being hit by a large enough cosmic body that it was ripped apart.... I can't really think of any other way it could fail.

However if you mean by the standards of the intergalactic coalition of solar systems.. idk, the jury is still out on that one

;)
 Ravenstar66
Joined: 8/27/2007
Msg: 37 (view)
 
Mankind's True Purpose
Posted: 2/8/2012 1:23:24 PM
To be successful enough at living to be able to procreate and pass on our genes. (it is the genes which are the survivors, not the vehicle for them - it's creepy - think about it - we really are only a means for genes to duplicate themselves, like viruses)

This success will be very different in different environments and cultures... in the west in 21st century physical strength isn't as important as it was say 4000 years ago, nor is disease resistance.... social ability is more a 'successful' trait that is going to get passed on. In paleolithic times sheer endurance and a quick fight or flight response may have been more successful - or in the case of females the ability to bear many children without it killing you. In the mediaeval times disease and infection resistance was probably your ticket.

Maybe... intelligence and altruism are one of the key factors to successful passing on of genes and that is why our psyches have evolved to lean towards them... it doesn't explain though why all the vicious power-hungry asshats are running the joint though. If we REALLY valued the finer traits we would reward them better.

just sayin'
 
Show ALL Forums