What do 'nerdy' guys like in girls?

[Char. Limit]

The Golden Rule: Treat others as you would wish that they treat you.

Also, I don't think the right to an abortion is "one of the most basic rights possible". I'm not going to argue about whether said right is right or wrong (I don't want to start a flame war, and I'm not sure where exactly I stand), but it is also not basic.

If a man (or a woman; they aren't perfect either) cheats on their spouse, and their lover knows of the marriage, the lover as well as the cheater are at fault.

 

[Magellan7t]

Also, I feel sorry for Tiger. I'm quite sure that if Annika Sorenstam was found to be involved in dozens of affairs, there would be not nearly as much coverage, and many people would place the blame on the men for "willfully doing Annika Sorenstam's family an injury."

I also happen to believe that Americans spend too much time focusing on celebrities in general. Of course, there isn't a thing I can do to change that.

I have a hard time feeling sorry for a man who lives so comfortably, but he will get more attention for this than the millions of others who do the same thing. One of the downsides of life in the public eye. Personally, I'm not focused specifically on Tiger's case, but DanP's ideas instead.

I agree that Americans spend what seems like an unhealthy amount of time obsessing over the lives of celebrities.

 

[DanP]

I agree with this.I see what you're saying, but I think you misunderstand my point. What I'm saying is the responsibility is shared. Tiger deserves most of the blame, but the mistresses have some to own as well.

I personally would never blame any 3rd person if my girlfriend would cheat on me. In fact, I am not sure I would even blame her. Because, really no one is to blame. There is no blame in being yourself, whatever that means. And if by being herself means cheating, so be it. I am not into the business of changing life partners thinking and action patterns, life is too short for this. I would just move away to another relation.

EDIT: I realize that the sensibility to various form of stress is largely individual, and there might be persons who might have a hard time coping with cheating.

Cheating is about decisions. She / he decided to cheat in a relationship. If it happens and you find it disturbed you, you should make a cold analysis of what you want, and act accordingly.

Do you know what the Golden Rule is?

A largely fuzzy ethic system which is anchored into religious beliefs. Unfortunately, I can't say I value it too much, since in Western World religious beliefs led to paradoxical situations, in which 'ethic' was largely unilateral from a sex point of view. I think
we can thank to religious/church influences the fact that women couldn't vote or have an abortion till very late in modern times. While the principle was sound, It's practical implementation was a joke.

 

[Magellan7t]

I personally would never blame any 3rd person if my girlfriend would cheat on me. In fact, I am not sure I would even blame her. Because, really no one is to blame. There is no blame in being yourself, whatever that means. And if by being herself means cheating, so be it. I am not into the business of changing life partners thinking and action patterns, life is too short for this. I would just move away to another relation.

EDIT: I realize that the sensibility to various form of stress is largely individual, and there might be persons who might have a hard time coping with cheating.

If we were talking about organisms without intellect, such as insects, you would be right - they simply are what they are. People, on the other hand, make choices which they have to account for. People who aren't fit to account for their actions are generally wards of someone who can.

Cheating is about decisions. She / he decided to cheat in a relationship. If it happens and you find it disturbed you, you should make a cold analysis of what you want, and act accordingly.

An android or a sociopath might handle it just that way. Betrayal of trust is much more difficult than that for most, especially where the welfare of children is involved.

A largely fuzzy ethic system which is largely anchored into religious beliefs. Unfortunately, I can't say I value it too much, since in Western World religious beliefs led to paradoxical situations, in which 'ethic' was largely unilateral from a sex point of view. I think
we can thank to religious/church influences the fact that women couldn't vote or have an abortion till very late in modern times. While the principle was sound, It's practical implementation was a joke.

As an atheist who cares very little for religion and superstition, I don't think it's reasonable to throw away a good principle just because it has ties to a religious philosophy. Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

 

[DanP]

If we were talking about organisms without intellect, such as insects, you would be right - they simply are what they are. People, on the other hand, make choices which they have to account for. People who aren't fit to account for their actions are generally wards of someone who can.

I believe humans are what they are. I'm not saying that it's impossible for a human to change and grow. I say that they must change from free will.I don't ask for change in my partners. I've chosen the generic "her" because she was what I liked and desired. It would be hypocritical to con a woman into a relationship and then demand change. If you discover later that she is not what you want, move on.

As for accounting. In the case of cheating she (my partner) is only morally accountable to me (her SO). And even that it;s questionable, since you don't own another human. If I decide that it's really her right to enjoy her sexuality, her life and be happy, why would you hold her accountable for ? Who or what gives you the right ?

Society can only pretend so much. Namely, not breaking the laws of the realm. The way in which some persons choose to express their sexuality, as long as it doesn't break the criminal code, should not be any concern for the society at large.

An android or a sociopath might handle it just that way. Betrayal of trust is much more difficult than that for most, especially where the welfare of children is involved.

Different humans cope in different ways with perceived or real betrayal of trust. I give you that.

While I do believe that is best for children under a certain age to grow up in a tied family, I am not the adept of the theory that parents should stay in a "empty love" (that it , commitment only without any other forms of intimacy) for the sake of the children. You can go on your own paths in life and enjoy it, and still be a very responsible parent.

It may be difficult in certain legislative systems with idiotic divorce rules, and certainly lack of money (generally speaking, resources) is a serious issue, and IMO it accounts for most of the couples who had their relation gone south and are still married.

Also, I feel the term "sociopath" is used way too easy those days. You don't have to be a sociopath to take a damn decision. In the end, any human involved in such a situation *will* have to take a decision. It's unavoidable. taking decisions without spending time with a shrink doesn't make you sociopath. You have to choose whatever you want to save the relationship or end it. ideally you should make the decision as soon as possible, but also
in "cold blood".

As an atheist who cares very little for religion and superstition, I don't think it's reasonable to throw away a good principle just because it has ties to a religious philosophy. Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

As I said, the principle sounds good. But it's fuzzy, since what I would not like done unto me is certainly not identical with what you would not like done onto you. We will most likely agree in most ethical problems, but I am sure we would also find more than enough grey territory and contention points.

 

[Magellan7t]

You know, I'd like to continue the debate, but we've derailed the thread for about a page at this point. I'm not sure how much MissSilvy or the moderators will appreciate it.

If you want to continue the debate, you could make a new thread so we aren't messing up someone else's topic of discussion.

On topic: Like others have said, I like women who:

1. Have an intellectual thirst
2. A willingness to get into the dirt and put in some hard work always impresses me
3. Argue in a reasonable fashion. Yelling the loudest != winning
4. Have fun and be happy in general. A good sense of humor is very important

That's not in order of importance. Physical attractiveness seems to vary by how much I like their personality. Firm, generous, round bottoms are tops, though.

 

[Char. Limit]

Intelligence is a must. So is sensibility. Looks are medium on the importance scale. I'm actually one of those men who isn't a fan of, as a classmate jokingly put on a Mr. CVHS application, "huge jugs". Also, I'd like her to wait until marriage to have sex, and she had BETTER be faithful. I absolutely will NOT tie myself to a cheater, and if such an event occurs during marriage... well, have you heard the song "Little Smirk" by Theory of a Deadman? That, and I'd have a good divorce lawyer within 15 minutes.

 

[MotoH]

Intelligence is a must. So is sensibility. Looks are medium on the importance scale. I'm actually one of those men who isn't a fan of, as a classmate jokingly put on a Mr. CVHS application, "huge jugs". Also, I'd like her to wait until marriage to have sex, and she had BETTER be faithful. I absolutely will NOT tie myself to a cheater, and if such an event occurs during marriage... well, have you heard the song "Little Smirk" by Theory of a Deadman? That, and I'd have a good divorce lawyer within 15 minutes.

She will still take you for everything you've got. Now a days a guy is better off marrying a dog. At least you know your dog won't run away from you.

 

[DaveC426913]

She will still take you for everything you've got. Now a days a guy is better off marrying a dog. At least you know your dog won't run away from you.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0072730/ Anyone not seen it?

 

[Char. Limit]

She will still take you for everything you've got. Now a days a guy is better off marrying a dog. At least you know your dog won't run away from you.

Well, yes, but if I accept that I only have one option left... and it involves knives.

So really I'd be better off following ToaD's example and not getting life in prison for double murder.

And remember: if a woman cheats, I'm not Jesus, I will not forgive. All ties and bonds of trust are broken, replaced by hurt and hatred.

And the strange part? I can articulate these thoughts, but I've never been cheated upon. I've never even broken up with anyone. I've only entered one relationship, and it's not done.

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

Well, yes, but if I accept that I only have one option left... and it involves knives.

So really I'd be better off following ToaD's example and not getting life in prison for double murder.

And remember: if a woman cheats, I'm not Jesus, I will not forgive. All ties and bonds of trust are broken, replaced by hurt and hatred.

And the strange part? I can articulate these thoughts, but I've never been cheated upon. I've never even broken up with anyone. I've only entered one relationship, and it's not done.

You are still young yet though it may never happen at all. I've only been cheated on once and it was not a serious relationship. It still made me angry especially when she suddenly decided to tell me that she loved me when she realized that I would not forgive easily.

I would agree that in most cases you can not trust (and therefore can not continue a relationship) with a cheater. There may be instances where it is possible but I would not know them.

 

[DaveC426913]

And remember: if a woman cheats, I'm not Jesus, I will not forgive. All ties and bonds of trust are broken, replaced by hurt and hatred.

Only a Sith speaks in absolutes.

Before judging harshly, one must ensure one's own poo-pot is clean. One must check if onesself if one has been wholly innocent in the events (such as neglect, unavailability) that led up to the final act of trust-breaking.

Not speaking from experience, just noting that there is no such thing as black-and-white in the real world.

 

[Char. Limit]

I don't think a Star Wars quote is an effective method of refuting an argument...

If my partner feels that I am not providing a certain something in a relationship, then she should tell me. It's definitely a better idea than breaking the most serious point of trust in a relationship. I recognize that I have faults; in fact, I like to think that I have many more faults than the average person. Hey, it keeps my ego down. However, if you talk to me about them, I'll try to fix them. Communication is essential to a relationship.

Also, of course black and white exist! Haven't you ever seen a 1-bit color palette?

 

[MotoH]

I don't think a Star Wars quote is an effective method of refuting an argument...

If my partner feels that I am not providing a certain something in a relationship, then she should tell me. It's definitely a better idea than breaking the most serious point of trust in a relationship. I recognize that I have faults; in fact, I like to think that I have many more faults than the average person. Hey, it keeps my ego down. However, if you talk to me about them, I'll try to fix them. Communication is essential to a relationship.

Also, of course black and white exist! Haven't you ever seen a 1-bit color palette?

There. You see, Lord Vader, she can be reasonable. Continue with the operation; you may fire when ready.

 

[GeorginaS]

Only a Sith speaks in absolutes.

Before judging harshly, one must ensure one's own poo-pot is clean. One must check if onesself if one has been wholly innocent in the events (such as neglect, unavailability) that led up to the final act of trust-breaking.

Not speaking from experience, just noting that there is no such thing as black-and-white in the real world.

And there's the nub of the absolutes given here. I have to question both the age of the person and the maximum length of the time a person's ever been involved in a single relationship when they're issuing the, "I'd immediately head to a lawyer in two seconds or less" statements. When you've been with someone for 15, 20 years, have children together, a mortgage, other financial commitments, other ties, shared history, the decision becomes a lot more complicated as do the motivations. Human relationships aren't so clear cut. When I hear clear cut proclamations it tends to make me wonder about age and experience.

 

[Char. Limit]

Of course I'm young and inexperienced! Haven't you read any of my other posts? I'm a 17-year-old virgin who just happens to expect a few things from a relationship. I sometimes use a bit of hyperbole to drive through my statements. Is that wrong?

By the same argument, Einstein was in his twenties in the 1900s... Obviously much too young and inexperienced to be able to contribute to a discussion, yes?

Also, I'm going to always be faithful... why should I not want, nay, expect the same thing in return? And before you say "you will not always be faithful", if I have the self-control never to take drugs, smoke, or drink alcohol, I think I have the self-control for that.

Finally, for the record, I said ten minutes, not two seconds. There's a 30000% difference.

 

[GeorginaS]

Of course I'm young and inexperienced! Haven't you read any of my other posts? I'm a 17-year-old virgin who just happens to expect a few things from a relationship. I sometimes use a bit of hyperbole to drive through my statements. Is that wrong?

By the same argument, Einstein was in his twenties in the 1900s... Obviously much too young and inexperienced to be able to contribute to a discussion, yes?

Also, I'm going to always be faithful... why should I not want, nay, expect the same thing in return? And before you say "you will not always be faithful", if I have the self-control never to take drugs, smoke, or drink alcohol, I think I have the self-control for that.

Finally, for the record, I said ten minutes, not two seconds. There's a 30000% difference.

Sorry, I haven't memorised your personal details from other posts. No, I don't know your age or virginity status. All I was saying was that a) I was agreeing with what Dave said and b) commenting on how those posts sounded to me (sounded a lot like me, actually, about 20 something odd years ago) and that experience, I think, teaches something different.

I'm not saying you don't have a place in the conversation. Of course you do. I'm just offering a bit of wisdom from a few decades hence.

 

[Char. Limit]

Oh.

Sorry for the... irritated response. It's become a habit of mine to be irritated when I perceive that I am being excluded from a discussion on basis of my age. A reaction, if you will.

This especially occurs when I feel that I understand the topic of discussion better than the "adults" do (N/A here).

However, hyperbole and sarcasm are tools that should be used to make sure a point is understood. I also enjoy reading posts by other people using sarcasm. This includes if the sarcasm is directed at me, as long as I know it's sarcastic.

I apologize for exploding at you. However, I still choose to believe that absolutes can exist and even be reasonable. For example, I believe we can all agree that premeditated murder is wrong. That is an absolute. You will not find someone who says that premeditated murder is OK.

 

[DanP]

Only a Sith speaks in absolutes.

The Dark side of the force is a pathway to many abilities, some considered to be unnatural.

Before judging harshly, one must ensure one's own poo-pot is clean. One must check if onesself if one has been wholly innocent in the events (such as neglect, unavailability) that led up to the final act of trust-breaking.

This is certainly so. Conventional theory goes that the cheater is always at fault, and the "victim" has no fault whatsoever. But as you said things are not so black and white.

 

[DanP]

Oh.

Sorry for the... irritated response. It's become a habit of mine to be irritated when I perceive that I am being excluded from a discussion on basis of my age. A reaction, if you will.

This especially occurs when I feel that I understand the topic of discussion better than the "adults" do (N/A here).

You don't have anything to apologize for man. Your reactions are perfectly natural. Still, if I may add a piece of advice, lose the whole "sex after marriage" attitude. Get laid now, and explore.

 

[DanP]

Interestingly enough, the vast majority of ppl in this thread gone into saying they want "a pleasant personality", "intelligence" and so on. I've seen only one post hinting at competence, and that is indeed another factor to "love". Also very few hinting at physical
traits.

Psychology experiments show that this is the normal reaction when ppl are asked about attraction, but that in fact that physical attractiveness ratings are extremely important. Furthermore it seems that females keep in high regard power and status, while males don't give a damn about it.

Im not saying that you can't be different, that's it , a variance. But for the overwhelming majority of humans physical attractiveness is important, while they do try to disguise this fact when asked.

 

[DanP]

She will still take you for everything you've got. Now a days a guy is better off marrying a dog. At least you know your dog won't run away from you.

"She" is not the enemy. I can thank women for some of the best moments in my life.

If you live in a society where "she can take all you have", don't get married. I really think that some legislations regarding family are a pain in the ***, and by not having permissive enough rules they act as a deterrent to legal marriage, instead of strengthening it.

Various forms of serial monogamy outside of legal marriage seem to work very well nowadays.

 

[MotoH]

Are you speaking of Friends With Benefits?

 

[GeorginaS]

You don't have anything to apologize for man.

He was apologising for his reaction to me. You don't get to dismiss that.

Oh.

Sorry for the... irritated response. It's become a habit of mine to be irritated when I perceive that I am being excluded from a discussion on basis of my age. A reaction, if you will.

This especially occurs when I feel that I understand the topic of discussion better than the "adults" do (N/A here).

Thank you for being mature enough to recognise when you've overreacted and thank you for being man enough to apologise and explain your actions. I appreciate it, and it builds confidence for continued conversation.

 

[DanP]

He was apologising for his reaction to me. You don't get to dismiss that.

I just said that IMO he had no reason to apologize for anything.

 

[BobG]

She will still take you for everything you've got. Now a days a guy is better off marrying a dog. At least you know your dog won't run away from you.

This is the world of no-fault divorce and is gender neutral.

The person that stays home raising the kids, maintaining the house (regardless of whether it's the father or mother) is giving up the chance to develop their own professional career. In a divorce, that person will be compensated. (This will be considered true even if the person gave up the career of a high school dropout working in a strip club to stay home and care for the kids of a CEO.)

Which means:

1) Marry someone both capable of and committed to establishing their own career. They'll be self-sufficient and won't take your money (the two of you will still have to split up the property since she presumably bought half of it).

2) Make sure you're an equal parent. Not just the dad that plays with the kids after work, coaches soccer teams, and helps with homework, but all the other stuff, too. If both parents have a career, then the dad is going to have to miss work sometimes so he can take the kids to the doctor's appointments or stay home with them when they're sick. Seriously, if the kids' teachers, their pediatrician, their piano teacher, etc know the mother, but have no idea who you are, then it's not going to be too hard to figure out who's been raising the kids and then the question will be, "Why change things?"

Or, marry your own sugarmomma and become a stay at home dad. Then it's you that will take everything she's got if she decides to dump you for someone with a little more interesting life than yours. (Being that this thread is for nerdy guys, and not gigolos, this last will probably be unfeasible. It could make an interesting concept for a sitcom, though.)

Edit: Thinking about it, the last paragraph is probably just as sexist as thinking a woman should stay at home. Actually, I just have a hard time understanding why either would want a life staying at home every day. Even if I had been the primary child raiser, I would have needed at least a part time job.

 

[DanP]

Are you speaking of Friends With Benefits?

Not necessarily. FWB works well for many persons, but they do not represent a majority. You have to have a certain psychological build to enjoy a FWB relation, or other more extreme forms like "menage a trois". And FWB is not a monogamy by nature, there is no commitment expected. There are generally a set of ground rules to be observed, and in most cases a policy of "dont tell, don't ask"

Serial monogamy is a form of relation where partners enter in monogamous relationships characterized by having physical attraction, intimacy and commitment, but they do not expect it to last indefinitely. When it's over, it's over.

There are forms of serial monogamy which include one or more legal marriages, but the form I am referring to is just a string of monogamous relations with variable lengths, without no legal marriage, and which do not exclude offspring.

 

[Char. Limit]

There is a reason that people choose not to rank physical attrativeness high on the list. They do not want to be seen as "base", and this is the fear that they have. A fear of contempt, maybe?

I can reply that physical attractiveness is moderately important to me, but not the be-all-end-all, because I don't think that saying so makes me a base person. Especially not if I'm a teenager. After all, I'm supposed to have those impulses.

 

[DaveC426913]

I just said that IMO he had no reason to apologize for anything.

If he's overreacted and bit Georgina due to a misunderstanding on his part and he's realized that and chose to amend his relationship with G - then she's right; it's not your place to dismiss that.

 

[DanP]

If he's overreacted and bit Georgina due to a misunderstanding on his part and he's realized that and chose to amend his relationship with G - then she's right; it's not your place to dismiss that.

I don't consider he overreacted. He is 17. Recall how we all where at 17. This is the gist, I don't believe the man has anything to apologize for. You may all differ, and expect apologies from 17 years old, but I don't. It's natural for him to try and assert himself in the front of older generation. A 40somethig years old should be less rigid, he was already there.

 

[BobG]

Oh...

I apologize for exploding at you.

Why a person should never apologize on the internet? We're up to 5 posts about the apology (counting this one) and the betting pool has opened.

My bet is two pages.

Edit: Oops! Make that 6. DanP snuck in another post while I was typing this one.

 

[DaveC426913]

I don't consider he overreacted.

Well, he does.

Or do you know better because you're older than him?

He is 17. Recall how we all where at 17. This is the gist, I don't believe the man has anything to apologize for. You may all differ, and expect apologies from 17 years old, but I don't. It's natural for him to try and assert himself in the front of older generation. A 40somethig years old should be less rigid, he was already there.

Is it all right with you if Char. Limit exhibits some independent thought and apologizes of his own free will for actions that he feels deserves an apology? Or are you going to continue to tell him he's wrong - that he should not have done something he chose to do?


The irony here is that everyone else is treating Char.Limit as an adult except you. You feel that the acceptability of his behaviour is defined by his age and you are telling him what he wants to do is wrong.

Put me down for 15 posts.

 

[DanP]

Is it all right with you if Char. Limit exhibits some independent thought and apologizes of his own free will for actions that he feels deserves an apology?

Yes it is allright.

Or are you going to continue to tell him he's wrong - that he should not have done something he chose to do?

Sorry man, I didnt told him that he is wrong to apologize. I told him that I find his attitude natural, and IMO he has nothing to apologize for. He did nothing wrong in my eyes, and I informed him of my support and understanding.

 

[DanP]

The irony here is that everyone else is treating Char.Limit as an adult except you. You feel that the acceptability of his behaviour is defined by his age and you are telling him what he wants to do is wrong.

Put me down for 15 posts.

fundamental attribution error.

 

[DaveC426913]

fundamental attribution error.

Elaborate how you think that is applicable here.

 

[DanP]

Elaborate how you think that is applicable here.

You make dispositional rather than situational explanations for my behavior.

EDIT: since you wanted an elaboration:

dispositional:
- everyone else is treating Char.Limit as an adult except you
- You *feel* that the acceptability of his behavior is defined by his age
- you are telling him what he wants to do is wrong.

situational:
- I feel that the situation is not so bad at all and doesn't needs an apology
- he *is* a 17 years old , thing which do not exclude him beeing a adult
- I can understand his behaviour. I really do.
- I am not telling him that what he wants to do is wrong. I told him that "he has no reasons to apologize" in this *situation*
as opposed to "apologizing is wrong"

 

[Dembadon]

... Recall how we all where at 17. ... You may all differ, and expect apologies from 17 years old, but I don't. A 40somethig years old should be less rigid, he was already there.

Apologies are/should be taught from the moment one can form words. Owning up to one's behavior and taking responsibility for it is a part of maturing. There is nothing wrong with it. It is a sign of maturity.

... It's natural for him to try and assert himself in the front of older generation. ...

One does not need to overreact to assert oneself, no matter the environment. He simply apologized for overreacting.

 

[DanP]

One does not need to overreact to assert oneself, no matter the environment. He simply apologized for overreacting.

True, but it happens very often. Second, I don't feel what he did in this situation was so wrong. I simply informed him of my view over the incident. As I said, you may all disagree with me, and this is OK, but it doesn't have anything to do with "apology is good or wrong", "responsibility and perceived responsibility" and so on.

 

[Magellan7t]

Or, marry your own sugarmomma and become a stay at home dad. Then it's you that will take everything she's got if she decides to dump you for someone with a little more interesting life than yours. (Being that this thread is for nerdy guys, and not gigolos, this last will probably be unfeasible. It could make an interesting concept for a sitcom, though.)

Edit: Thinking about it, the last paragraph is probably just as sexist as thinking a woman should stay at home. Actually, I just have a hard time understanding why either would want a life staying at home every day. Even if I had been the primary child raiser, I would have needed at least a part time job.

Not necessarily. Most of the women who have made advances toward me are older women, usually in their forties, which according to all my friends is kind of strange. Stranger still, virtually all the women of any age who've come on to me were hispanic. I've never been able to figure out why, but it suits me fine - I like older women and latinas.

Some people have no personal ambition and simply want to be taken care of. You don't have to think or worry too much. You just establish your simple routine and do it every day. I've noticed that the people who really hold onto the stay at home position are excitable and tend to have an unusually low threshold and tolerance for stress.

Apologies are/should be taught from the moment one can form words. Owning up to one's behavior and taking responsibility for it is a part of maturing. There is nothing wrong with it. It is a sign of maturity.

I've got to agree with this and what Dave has said. I'm impressed with Char's attitude. He's got better manners than I had at that age.

 

[Char. Limit]

I am laughing at this entire argument...

I think that the true irony is that both sides are claiming the other is wrong... but they're both right. I did overreact, in my view, but DanP is, after all, only defending his (I assume you're a guy) opinion.

In other news, you do have to keep in mind that with the divorce rate as high as it is, you are more likely than not to have your marriage fail. And we all know what happens then...

 

[DaveC426913]

...with the divorce rate as high as it is, you are more likely than not to have your marriage fail...

Not so bad really, considering the only other end to a marriage is death...

 

[Char. Limit]

Well, don't marriage vows include "till death do us part"?

With that part, a marriage ending in death is a "success".

Marraige -only here is dying considered a success.

 

[Magellan7t]

I am laughing at this entire argument...

It's a silly argument, but nerds will argue most anything. Especially on the internet.

Good signature, by the way, Dave. That song always got on my nerves a little.

 

[DanP]

It's a silly argument, but nerds will argue most anything. Especially on the internet.

Ironically, things tend to go much more smoothly over a beer :P A bit of direct experience with the other person works mini-wonders, and you tend to be a bit more empathic

 

[DanP]

Hatfield & all, 1966:

http://www2.hawaii.edu/~elaineh/13.pdf

this is an older study, but the conclusions are nevertheless interesting.

It basically concludes that the only strong predictor of the desire to date again after a initial date is physical attractiveness. (other factors considered where intelligence, personality, self acceptance).

 

[rootX]

Intelligent, responsible, and down to Earth girls are so awesome!

 

[MotoH]

Intelligent, responsible, and down to Earth girls are so awesome!

I prefer astronauts myself.

 

[DanP]

I prefer astronauts myself.

If you marry one, you can safely say that you cornered the market :P

 

[rootX]

I prefer astronauts myself.

I was talking about a girl in arts in particular. Profession doesn't seem to matter IMO.

 

[DanP]

I was talking about a girl in arts in particular. Profession doesn't seem to matter IMO.

Let's stereotype , for the fun of it. Artists are anything but: down to Earth & responsible.