Gyroscopic Investing

anyone try it? any good stories.

me...i've gone on some dates...dated one for a while...got dumped 2x by same one...no connection w/ the others i met.

Find a local meetup.com group (meetin.org in another) or other group of people who enjoy the same things you do.

I met my wife online, I kid you not.  As an engineer I work with all men, bars annoy me (although I love beer) and I'm not the church going type (much to my family's dismay).  My wife was a teacher who worked with all women and doesn't drink at all.  She's more religious than me, but not by much.  Also, I had just moved to Wichita and hadn't really gotten the lay of the land.  I tried the online thing and dated about 5 women before I met my wife.

Online dating has some drawbacks, but it does allow me to filter out certain undesirables.  For example, I met a girl in college that I ended up dating for over a year despite a terrible personality and few common interests.  She was quite liberal too (I dumped her after she told me flat out that I wouldn't be "allowed" to have any firearms in our future home, ha!).  Basically I got to enjoy over a year fighting constantly because I let a really gorgeous exterior put parts of me in control other than my brain.  Online dating let me narrow the pool to people who were at least somewhat similar with respect to morals/values (or at least said they were).  There are also important issues like a desire to have children that don't usually come out early.  Sometimes if you wait too long to discover those deal breakers I find you can become invested enough that you negotiate away their importance and really hurt yourself down the road.  My experience was that people tend to be honest about how they feel at the moment regarding those types of issues in their profile.

In any case, as a rather large man my concerns over being abducted and raped were somewhat limited.  For me the pitfalls of online dating were being committed to a first date with a potentially boring person.  It worked out well for me and I encourage anyone who's work or social life makes meeting people challenging to give it a try.

EDIT: My wife and I have been together for 4 years now, married for 1.5 years.  I still fully intend to die married to her.  My plan to go first by indulging in bacon is well in hand.

murphy_p_t wrote: anyone try it? any good stories.

Online dating is a scam industry.  No scientific basis.  No real compatiblity matching.  Self-selected ("elitism") participants.  No real innovation.  Promise vs application has yet to align.

A huge disappointment so far, but just begging to be disrupted by an entrepreneur with real passion instead of just wanting to make a buck exploiting people or getting VC funding with me-too garbage.

Personal compatibility similarity is everything for a successful long-term relationship.  That is extremely hard to find offline or online by happenstance.  Until that changes, it is all a crapshoot.

I find the idea of bars being a good place to meet potential mates one of those "only humans could come up with that" pieces of stupidity.

Here's why: If you ask most people whether their ideal mate would like to hang out in bars most people would say NO, and yet they go to bars hoping to meet their ideal mate.

With women especially, I think that if they described the perfect husband it would probably be a man who consumed very little alcohol or perhaps none at all, and yet there they are in a designated alcohol consumption area looking for Mr. Right.

One of the things that I think makes it so frustrating to try to find the right person for you is that person tends to change over time.  The kind of person you want to date is often a different kind of person than you want to co-parent your children.

A person who can find a good partner who is able to meet his/her needs through the various stages of life while maintaining his/her interest and engagement the whole time is a rare thing.  People who find this sort of partner are very fortunate.

One of the ways I think you can determine whether a relationship is working for you is to see if the amount you get out of it is a function of how much you put into it.  If it becomes more fulfilling the harder you try and the more you commit yourself to it, it might be something that can work long term.  If it's something that only becomes more frustrating as you put more energy and commitment into it, then it might be a good idea to look somewhere else.

I think another thing that many people can benefit from is sincere effort at self-improvement.  One of the easiest ways to attract more people is to make yourself more attractive.

If it's something that only becomes more frustrating as you put more energy and commitment into it, then it might be a good idea to look somewhere else.

Hmm...."something that only becomes more frustrating as you put more energy and commitment into it"....I think you just described pretty much ALL relationships (whether achieved through online dating or otherwise).

Seriously, wasn't Harry Browne against tying yourself down by getting into a relationship or even worse, getting married?

D1984 wrote:

If it's something that only becomes more frustrating as you put more energy and commitment into it, then it might be a good idea to look somewhere else.

Hmm...."something that only becomes more frustrating as you put more energy and commitment into it"....I think you just described pretty much ALL relationships (whether achieved through online dating or otherwise).

Seriously, wasn't Harry Browne against tying yourself down by getting into a relationship or even worse, getting married?

Harry Browne strikes me as a man who never found a mate who matched him. I think most of his writings are very good, but his relationship advice reads very bitterly.

There are many, many relationships that grow and blossom the more time you put into them. Anyone who thinks otherwise simply hasn't found one yet. It doesn't even have to be romantic; could simply be an ideal best friend.

Pointedstick wrote:
Harry Browne strikes me as a man who never found a mate who matched him. I think most of his writings are very good, but his relationship advice reads very bitterly.

Perhaps what you see as bitter and cynical I see as pragmatic and realistic. No point in being pollyannaish and denying reality, is there?

There are many, many relationships that grow and blossom the more time you put into them. Anyone who thinks otherwise simply hasn't found one yet. It doesn't even have to be romantic; could simply be an ideal best friend.

That has not been my experience. I see plenty of people ranging from family mebers to coworkers who only seem to get into more disagreements and arguments the more time and effort they put into their relationships. Granted, I don't have any personal experience in this vein...but isn't one of our strengths as rational human beings the ability to profit by the (sometimes admittedly bad) examples of others?

I just tend to avoid getting into relationships and don't form friendships. That solves a lot of problems  in life (generally by preventing them from ever coming up in the first place).

Well, not to boast, but I know rewarding relationships are possible because I'm in one right now. I've been extremely fortunate, but I also truly believe that there's a soul mate out there for everyone.

After my first wife of 27 years died I waited a few years and then decided I wanted to get married again. I had no clue how to even begin meeting someone so I began searching online through profiles like on Yahoo. What I discovered is that women around my age (I was mid 50's) tended to be divorced and looking for Mr. perfect the second time around, even going so far as to state exact height and weight requirements along with some very hilarious "must do this" and "must be that" nonsense. Since I didn't meet most of the requirements and had the added disadvantage of raising a 6-year-old granddaughter I soon gave up hope.

I tried that dating site you see advertised all the time and after spending at least a half an hour filling out their profile they ran it through the system and replied that they didn't have any matches for me at this time.

So one day I was sitting in the John and reading a funny article by Fred Reed about the superiority of Asian women and I decided to go online and see what I could find. I put a profile on a site called Cherry Blossoms and must have gotten 100 responses the first night.

The very first one was from a woman in the Philippines who was also a widow and who, at age 38, was two years younger than what I stated I was looking for in my profile but I said what the heck and started chatting with her.

We will be happily married for 8 years on Sunday.

Personally, I think this is an excellent way to meet someone.

After my first wife of 27 years died I waited a few years and then decided I wanted to get married again. I had no clue how to even begin meeting someone so I began searching online through profiles like on Yahoo. What I discovered is that women around my age (I was mid 50's) tended to be divorced and looking for Mr. perfect the second time around, even going so far as to state exact height and weight requirements along with some very hilarious "must do this" and "must be that" nonsense. Since I didn't meet most of the requirements and had the added disadvantage of raising a 6-year-old granddaughter I soon gave up hope.

I tried that dating site you see advertised all the time and after spending at least a half an hour filling out their profile they ran it through the system and replied that they didn't have any matches for me at this time.

So one day I was sitting in the John and reading a funny article by Fred Reed about the superiority of Asian women and I decided to go online and see what I could find. I put a profile on a site called Cherry Blossoms and must have gotten 100 responses the first night.

The very first one was from a woman in the Philippines who was also a widow and who, at age 38, was two years younger than what I stated I was looking for in my profile but I said what the heck and started chatting with her.

We will be happily married for 8 years on Sunday.

Personally, I think this is an excellent way to meet someone.

You are (sadly) correct about the unrealistic, "Mr. Perfect", entitlement princess standards too many (admittedly far from all) western women have today. I am glad your marrying a foreign woman worked out for you but it's not something I'd ever try; for all anyone knows, once the two (or is it three now?) years were up and she had her green card, she could divorce you just like her American-born counterparts could. In some ways the problem at its root is not women (or men, for that matter) but the fact that the divorce laws are too often one-sided and prenups aren't upheld as ironclad contracts like they should be.

Plus, there's the issue for an atheist/agnostic like myself  and perhaps other board members (and I would wager that this board has a higher percentage of non-believers than the general population of the US) that marrying a women from SE Asia invariably means she's going to be a (more or less) fundamentalist Catholic (Phillipines), Muslim (much of Indonesia and Malaysia), or Buddhist  perhaps w/some animist variations (Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Thailand). Not exactly a great match for a skeptical-minded atheist.

Well, not to boast, but I know rewarding relationships are possible because I'm in one right now.

Since the posters here are keen to point out logical fallacies (witness the gun control debate), here's one for you:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hasty_generalization

Pick a small enough sample size and you can prove anything. The fact remains that roughly 50% of mariages in America end in divorce and oftentimes in financial devastation as well.

I've been extremely fortunate, but I also truly believe that there's a soul mate out there for everyone.

HA HA HA HA HA HA



I needed that. Seriously.

Can I please have some of what you're smoking?

Some people just don't need companionship/love and prefer being alone.

I'm not trying to claim that all relationships are happy, just that happy relationships are possible. You seem to believe that they're impossible. A single correct anecdotal example is sufficient to disprove a claim of impossibility! 

That divorce statistic is sort of an interesting one, but I wonder how much of it comes from the increasing social acceptability of divorce rather than a decline in the quality of marriage relationships. Both my sets of grandparents had miserable relationships but viewed divorce as a social impossibility. Today, they'd probably cut the ties and start again.

Pointedstick wrote: I'm not trying to claim that all relationships are happy, just that happy relationships are possible. You seem to believe that they're impossible. A single correct anecdotal example is sufficient to disprove a claim of impossibility!

One, the plural of anecdote is not data.

Two, I didn't say they were per se impossible; I said that it has not been my experience that they were possible. "Not proved possible" is different than "proved not possible." Based on the weight of the available evidence, I'm going to go with the hypothesis that it's more likely than not that getting into a relationship is more trouble and grief that it's worth. Look at it like this: I could (rather foolishly, I'll admit) choose to jump out of an airplane without a parachute. People have survived falls with no chute from upwards of 10,000 feet. But I'd never do it (unless forced to) because I know the odds are so heavily against me. Same with relationships. Maybe it would work out....more than likely (based on statistical odds) it would fail and I'd be worse off than I was before (that's not even considering the fact that my freedom would be curtailed when I was in said relationship). Getting into a serious relationship (to the point of marriage or even cohabiting) with someone is like getting onto a ship owned by a cruise line that has 50% of its vessels sink every trip and no lifeboats on board.

That divorce statistic is sort of an interesting one, but I wonder how much of it comes from the increasing social acceptability of divorce rather than a decline in the quality of marriage relationships. Both my sets of grandparents had miserable relationships but viewed divorce as a social impossibility. Today, they'd probably cut the ties and start again.

Somehow the choice of being in a miserable relationship doesn't seem any more appealing (except perhaps by not getting financially mauled in divorce court) than being divorced. Either one is a thoroughly bad alternative...it's like being asked to choose between life in prison and lethal injection. By not getting in a relationship and/or marriage in the first place, one precludes either of the above bad eventualities (divorce/acrimonious breakup or miserable, freedom-crushing, soul-destroying relationship) from happening to oneself.

D1984,

It sounds like being alone works for you. But it doesn't work for a lot of people. I am happy to have my girlfriend. She is really cool and has helped me develop into a totally different person than I would have if I had never met her. I have been broken up with before and it really sucked. But the joy from a relationship is worth the acute pain experienced every once in awhile for me.

Melveyr,

I wasn't trying to imply that being alone was the best idea for everyone; I apologize if it seemed that was what I was saying. I was simply trying to provide "the other side of the story" by giving rational, evidence-based reasons NOT to get in a relationship and showing how they had worked in my life. Honestly, I would probably just have said my piece and let the whole thing drop if it wasn't for the (blind-faith based) statement about there being "a soul mate out there for everyone." I could not let something like that go unanswered.

D1984 wrote: Melveyr,

I wasn't trying to imply that being alone was the best idea for everyone; I apologize if it seemed that was what I was saying. I was simply trying to provide "the other side of the story" by giving rational, evidence-based reasons NOT to get in a relationship and showing how they had worked in my life. Honestly, I would probably just have said my piece and let the whole thing drop if it wasn't for the (blind-faith based) statement about there being "a soul mate out there for everyone." I could not let something like that go unanswered.

That makes total sense. I have hard time buying anything based off of souls as well.

That makes total sense. I have hard time buying anything based off of souls as well.

It wasn't so much the "soul" thing that got me (although I agree with you that anything requiring a belief in souls isn't very evidence-based) as the belief that there is "someone for everyone."

One, that suggests some kind of grand plan/design, which if there is no grand planner/designer cannot exist (although Pointedstick may have meant the "soul" thing in "soul mates" metaphorically rather than talking about any sort of metaphysical entity....I think he did but I won't know until he replies again).

Two, why SHOULD there be someone for everyone? What immutable science-based natural law of physics, biology, or chemistry says there should be? What if some people were meant to be alone (by fate, destiny, divine Providence, being Darwinian-selected out of dating and relationships, whatever you want to believe in)? What if some people are just such loners they prefer their own company to that of others? What if someone is too socially inhibited to be with anyone whether he/she wants it or not (which would imply that his/her erstwhile "soulmate" would also be left all alone since this person was too shy to get with them in the first place). What if somebody's supposed "soulmate" got with another person instead (check out the paper "Genetic Evidence for Unequal Effective Population Sizes of Human Females and Males" for mitochondrial DNA evidence that only about 35-40% of prehistoric/early Neolithic human males ever got to pair up, mate and breed while roughly 70-80% of females did...the rest (60% or more) of the males were apparently just ignored and obviously didn't find their "soulmates" (or were killed off before they could) as those potential soulmates were busy pairing up, mating, and breeding with the 35 or 40% of those males mentioned above)?

To clarify a bit about the "soul mate" deal, I didn't mean it in the way that suggests some deity created a perfect match for everyone, or even that everyone has a perfect match. My wife whom I love very deeply has differences that require compromise, yet the fundamentals of our relationship are such that compromise comes easily because our natures are simply very compatible vis-a-vis the way we see the world, react to events, and make our goals. I think that's what I meant by "soul mate" rather than any kind of religious or new-agey meaning. 

But hey, I could be wrong. I'm willing to acknowledge the existence of people who are so asocial that they prefer solitude to companionship.

D1984 wrote: Plus, there's the issue for an atheist/agnostic like myself  and perhaps other board members (and I would wager that this board has a higher percentage of non-believers than the general population of the US) that marrying a women from SE Asia invariably means she's going to be a (more or less) fundamentalist Catholic (Phillipines), Muslim (much of Indonesia and Malaysia), or Buddhist  perhaps w/some animist variations (Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Thailand). Not exactly a great match for a skeptical-minded atheist.

If you insist on a fellow atheist China and Russia would be the best places to look thanks to the many years of communist rule. I actually spoke to a lady from Russia for a while but her English wasn't as good as those in the Philippines and I found that very frustrating despite the fact that she was drop dead gorgeous (something Russian women are famous for, BTW).

I would think a Buddhist wouldn't be all that incompatible with an atheist.  If you set your selection pool to include only atheists you might end up like those divorced ladies I found on Yahoo.

You also have to keep in mind that when it comes to the Christian religion especially, probably 90 percent or more of those who profess it don't actually take it all that seriously. My wife is a perfect case in point. She's Catholic but she despises the pope and most priests.  She feels the need to go to mass about three times a year and I used to go with her until I found out how incredibly boring a Catholic mass can be. I've asked her why she keeps going since she doesn't respect it but this does not compute. Apparently it's some kind of deep cultural thing.

As for the worries about a woman marrying you just to get a green card, for one thing I don't think having a green card guarantees you permanent residence if you divorce (citizenship does), and for another thing if you aren't a good enough judge of character to avoid marrying someone who would do that you should definitely stick with the domestic route.

The best experiences I have ever had have been the result of investments and risks I have taken in trusting other people in relationships.

Sometimes it has ended in disaster and sometimes it has given me satisfaction that I don't think I could have gotten anywhere else.

As I sit and write this I just finished putting together some toys this Christmas morning and there are three kids running around the house and almost everything they do makes me happy.  As the kids are running around, my wife is making me something to eat, and this is one of the many things that she does that also makes me very happy.

Good long-term relationships with good people are possible and I think it is a rare person who isn't a better person for having experienced them.

Harry Browne found a good partner later in life and it seemed to be a good experience for him.

Of course, everyone has to figure out what works for him/her, and I understand that what works for me may not work for everyone.

notsheigetz wrote: She feels the need to go to mass about three times a year and I used to go with her until I found out how incredibly boring a Catholic mass can be. I've asked her why she keeps going since she doesn't respect it but this does not compute. Apparently it's some kind of deep cultural thing.

"You can take a Catholic out of the church, but you can't take the church out of a Catholic!"

melveyr wrote: D1984,

It sounds like being alone works for you. But it doesn't work for a lot of people. I am happy to have my girlfriend. She is really cool and has helped me develop into a totally different person than I would have if I had never met her. I have been broken up with before and it really sucked. But the joy from a relationship is worth the acute pain experienced every once in awhile for me.

I decided after my first wife died to live alone for the rest of my life (I was 50). To be perfectly honest this was not because I wanted to honor her memory but because after 27 years of marriage I wanted to enjoy the freedom of not being yoked to another human beings wants and desires.

I lasted almost 5 years in that state of mind but I think the turning point occurred one day while I was getting a haircut by a lady barber. Whether it was the smell of her perfume, or the way she touched me as she fussed over my appearance I don't really know but from that moment on I started agreeing with the Bible where it says it isn't good for a man to be alone. I think some people are probably capable of living that way but I finally realized that I wasn't one of them.

One piece of marriage advice I would give from my own experience is that if you run into a case of opposites attracting as I did in my first marriage you ought to proceed slowly and consider how well that's going to work out for you in the long run. See above about why I didn't want to get married again.

Didn't make the same mistake twice however. The only people who seem to be unhappy now are my kids who wonder why I married someone so much different than their mother.

For instance, lack of religious intensity is very important to you. It was to me as well. I found quite a few lovely women out there in our increasingly heathen country who didn't give a hoot about religion. I dated a few who's faith was very important to them. They were great in many ways, but would not have been a good match for me, so I moved on after 3 or 4 dates when this became apparent. Now for a friend of mine - he is a practicing Catholic - the religion of his GF/spouse is irrelevant. He goes to church by himself every Sunday, and just works around the other stuff. He has had successful long-term relationships with women who were Jewish, Protestant and Atheist, and it was never religion that ended the relationship because that aspect was not a deal-breaker for him like it might be for you or I. Yet he is a non-smoker and several of these women smoked but it didn't bother him in the least. For me, that would have been an instant disqualifier.

It's not so much "lack of religious intensity" for me as it is "a value set based on thinking, logic, and evidence rather than on faith or on feelings." I would probably be more hypothetically compatiable with a liberal (in the sense of non-fundamentalist, not necessarily in the political sense....I don't think it would be fair for either of us if I was to get in a relationship with a fundamentalist; how can you love someone when you quite sincerely believe that by their very human nature they are evil and that because they are not "saved" they are going to burn for eternity when they die?) Christian who was otherwise rational and mostly kept religion out of her day-to-day existence than with an agnostic or "spiritual but not religious" type who believed in New-Agey nonsense or the like (or for instance was a rabid man-hating feminist) and actually made it a part of her everyday life. Honestly, though, this is all hypothetical because I'm not getting into a relationship anyway.

But hey, I could be wrong. I'm willing to acknowledge the existence of people who are so asocial that they prefer solitude to companionship.

You say "people who are so asocial that they prefer solitude to companionship" like it's a bad thing. 

If you insist on a fellow atheist China and Russia would be the best places to look thanks to the many years of communist rule. I actually spoke to a lady from Russia for a while but her English wasn't as good as those in the Philippines and I found that very frustrating despite the fact that she was drop dead gorgeous (something Russian women are famous for, BTW).

I don't personally insist on an atheist (like I said above, this is all hypothetical at this point anyway since I'd rather be alone to begin with); I was merely pointing out that IF I (or any nonbeliever) was looking at bringing a woman from SE Asia back to the States as a wife/girlfriend that there might be some serious compatibility issues involving belief systems (or the lack thereof).

I would think a Buddhist wouldn't be all that incompatible with an atheist.

Perhaps not as uncompatible as a hardcore "turn-or-burn" Christian or "Allah Akbar" Muslim but  "not as uncompatibale" doesn't mean compatible. My main beef with Buddhism (at least if seriously practiced and believed in) is that it basically says that if your station in this life is bad (poverty, discriminated against, crippled, etc) then you "earned" it by doing bad things in a past life whereas if you are rich, successful, in a powerful position in business or politics than you "deserved" it because you made merit or were good or whatever in one of your earlier lives. I find the whole idea of people being penalized for something they supposedly did in a (non-existent, since there's no real proof of past lives) past life absurd and the belief that they "deserve" watever bad things befall them in this life because of it to be a cruel excuse and oftentimes and excercise in "blame the victim." Sometimes bad things happen to people and they DO deserve it (albeit because of what they did in this life) but sometimes bad things happen to them because the system is rigged against them, and sometimes bad things happen to them just because (or to put it more blunty "s**t happens" )...there's no rhyme or reason...good things can happen to good and bad people alike, and vice versa. SO be it, it is what is is. Granted that their beliefs in karma and punishment in this life for actions in past ones aren't as repugnant (to me) as the belief in "original sin" ( "one of your distant ancestors ate a forbidden apple so now you're all going to suffer for it because you are descended from them....that sounds like something North Korea would do....you committed a crime againt Dear Leader so now you AND your entire family, kids, father, mother, siblings, grandpartents, etc must be punished by being sent to the gulag" ) they still don't make a lot of sense when looked at rationally.

I also don't understand how the Buddhist idea of nirvana makes any sense. You eventually attain a state of non-attachment to anything as your final destination and that's a GOOD thing? Maybe for doodle...I happen to like the (pleasant) parts of a material existence, thank you very much, and don't wish to become unattached to them.

Finally, there is the issue not so much with Buddhism but with the other spiritist/animist things that many poor rural (the kind that would probably be most interested in a--relatively and comparatively speaking--wealthy American)Thais/Laos/Khmers/Vietnamese seem to believe in addition. They believe things about ghosts and spirits (and let this effect their daily lives) that an eleven or twelve year old brought up in the west would find laughable, much less an adult.

If you set your selection pool to include only atheists you might end up like those divorced ladies I found on Yahoo.

A fair enough point but a moot one since I'm not trying to pick up dates (online or otherwise) in the first place.

As for the worries about a woman marrying you just to get a green card, for one thing I don't think having a green card guarantees you permanent residence if you divorce (citizenship does), and for another thing if you aren't a good enough judge of character to avoid marrying someone who would do that you should definitely stick with the domestic route.

I dn't know what kind of a "judge of character" I am but I do know that I have Asperger's and am not good at "reading between the lines" and detecting nonverbal cues or the intentions behind what someone is saying sometimes so I have decided it's better to just not trust anyone unless absolutely necessary.

The best experiences I have ever had have been the result of investments and risks I have taken in trusting other people in relationship

Some of the best experiences I have had had been the result of investments and risks I have taken financially....those seem to be more rewarding than the results of investments and risks in trusting someone in a relationship (it also has to be said that even if you do take a risk and buy an investment and it goes to zero all you've lost is your money....the stock or bond isn't going to turn around and divorce you and take you for half your net worth besides).

As I sit and write this I just finished putting together some toys this Christmas morning and there are three kids running around the house and almost everything they do makes me happy.  As the kids are running around, my wife is making me something to eat, and this is one of the many things that she does that also makes me very happy.

As I sit and write this reply I am so glad I have no kids (they cost on average around $200K each to age 19 and that's BEFORE paying for college...and that's not even considering the pleasures of NOT being woken up by a screaming infant at 3AM), that I don't have to worry about receiving or getting gifts (I and my family are not really close and they already know not to get me anything nor to expect anything from me; I don't really have friends to owrry about, and I have no significant other). There was a University of Minnesota study a few years back about how Christmas gifting was a huge waste of money because it failed to allow everyone to maximize their marginal utility and happiness with present buying (i.e. A would get B a present and B would get a A a present but because each one didn't know precisiely the other's revealed preferences as much as the other one did--indeed who knows more about what we REALLY want than we ourselves--then each ended up on average less satisified and with lower marginal utilty than if they had each spent the equivalent amount of money on something for themselves)...the amount "wasted" as far as marginal utilty not being maximized was several tens of billion $'s IIRC).

As far as food goes I am quite happy to cook for myself and since I don't live with anyone I get the advantage of the fact that I don't have to take anyone else's preferences (or indeed they my preferences) into consideration when buying food. I went ahead and bought enough groceries for the next week and a half on the 23rd; I now have enough to last me until next year and as such  until I go back to work on the 2nd I won't even have to leave my house (although I probably will at some point ) or even hear another huamn being's voice for the next week unless I want to. Ahh, solitude...one of the joys of the season.

Harry Browne found a good partner later in life and it seemed to be a good experience for him.

Maybe being a soft-touch weak-sauce sellout was a good experience for him. Sticking to my principles has been a good experience for me.

I decided after my first wife died to live alone for the rest of my life (I was 50). To be perfectly honest this was not because I wanted to honor her memory but because after 27 years of marriage I wanted to enjoy the freedom of not being yoked to another human beings wants and desires.

I decided a long time ago that I want to be alone (I am a few months away from 29 and have never been on a date or been in in a relationship) because like you said I enjoy the freedom of not being yoked to someone else. There might be some things worth sacrificing freedom for but companionship is not one of them.

I lasted almost 5 years in that state of mind but I think the turning point occurred one day while I was getting a haircut by a lady barber. Whether it was the smell of her perfume, or the way she touched me as she fussed over my appearance I don't really know but from that moment on I started agreeing with the Bible where it says it isn't good for a man to be alone. I think some people are probably capable of living that way but I finally realized that I wasn't one of them.

Good for you. For me, personally, I don't especially want someone to touch me unless they absolutely have to (doctor, physical therapist, hairdresser, TSA agent, etc) and even then I will tolerate it but I don't have to like it.

I am quite happy to be alone and plan on staying that way.

D1984 wrote: Good for you. For me, personally, I don't especially want someone to touch me unless they absolutely have to (doctor, physical therapist, hairdresser, TSA agent, etc) and even then I will tolerate it but I don't have to like it.

I am quite happy to be alone and plan on staying that way.

I definitely agree with you when it comes to the TSA agent. Almost busted one in the mouth not too long ago. Don't care for being touched in some of the places the doctor wants to do it either but fortunately they put you to sleep if it gets too invasive.

If you change your mind about being alone it does sound like you might be on the right track with the on-line dating idea.

I'm happily married, but if I had to put myself out there again, I would probably sign up for adult classes, maybe amateur astronomy. I met all of my girlfriends in school, and neither bars nor online dating sounds right for me. Still, for BUSY people, online dating makes a lot of sense. My sister-in-law meets most of her dates online. Granted, she's impossible to please and will probably be a spinster, but at least she's having some fun.