muggiwhplar

Cradle robbing will likely give you more drama than dating more age appropriate, attractive women. Especially given you pursue short term relationships mostly, a person losing their attractive qualities are far less pressing since you'll only be with them for a short time. You say biology, but it's a case where your biology is hurting more than helping. You are basically chasing pipe dreams when you could be preserving your "freedom" and still dating knock-outs who are statistically more independent and less clingy. Aka, better for you in the long run. So yeah, it's kind of an immature mentality. EDIT: page gets all over da place As women get older, they generally become more jaded and dramatic-- their expectations go up, while their "quality" goes down. Most guys in their 30s will tell you it's easier to date younger women than women their age, regardless of what you're looking for in a relationship. I don't know where you got the idea that I mostly pursue short term relationships. The longer a relationship lasts for me, the better.

I pictured you talking like Jerry Seinfeld when reading this post :D

If I couldn't use contraception (assuming you're including the "pull out method" which doesn't require condoms or the pill or anything :P), I would probably remain single until I researched my "options" to choose the best choice for my long-term happiness. You do realise that semenal release occurs prior to orgasm and the "pull out method" is nothing but male fantasy in terms of contraception, don't you? :blink: I've never heard of a woman getting pregnant from precum. Usually men are just too embarrassed to admit they couldn't control themselves and finished inside her w/o protection like an idiot. Either way, that's not something I do.

If I couldn't use contraception (assuming you're including the "pull out method" which doesn't require condoms or the pill or anything :P), I would probably remain single until I researched my "options" to choose the best choice for my long-term happiness.

The woman would very likely be an OLTR instead of an MLTR. Oh? Then why? Because some women are turned on by the thought of [bleep]ing an older man. Yes, because in the long term someone your own age is going to be able to provide for you all your life. A sixty year old will provide for you for twenty years, and then die. They won't leave you enough to provide for yourself unless they are (like I said) filthy rich. Men our age are generally poor and up to their armpits in debt. They don't have a well-paying job yet and they're still quite emotionally immature. Older men generally have their shit together and therefore are much better "providers." I think men hit their physical attractiveness peak at around their late 30s. But yeah, plenty of men lose all of their attractiveness when they get older because they don't set goals and take care of themselves. But the men that do take care of themselves can easily compete with men our age, assuming the women are interested in older men.

I would have thought someone who clearly has an interest in academic studies and statistics would understand the necessity of defining specific terms so other people can look at the stat you're quoting and say, "Right, I know exactly what you're referring to." Otherwise, it's not rigourous, which academic work has to be to have any meaning at all. The interpretation changes entirely depending on how you define the term. Consider it a monogamous relationship bound by the law then. Doesn't change anything. :P You call it shallow. I call it biology. :P

Yes, having kids = less freedom. Living with a significant other, whether poly or mono = less freedom. But if sacrificing your freedom ultimately makes you happier, then the loss of freedom is irrelevant. Clearly having a kid and/or living with a girl right now would be a terrible idea since I have no interest in either. If I change my mind down the road, I'd still operate within the poly system because it's superior to monogamy. Not necessarily. Wait. Are you saying that guys our age make better providers than men twice our age? :blink: When it comes to men, they generally get more attractive as they get older if they know how to keep themselves looking good. You're making the assumption that older men are unattractive, yet you're also failing to consider that physical attractiveness also isn't as crucial to men as it is to women. Older men are generally more successful and therefore more confident than younger men, and therefore more attractive. Lol I thought he was like 40. Whoops :P

Isn't that irrelevant considering my point remains the same regardless of which definition you use?

I'm not talking about "perfectly happy, monogamous, long-term relationships"; I'm talking about traditional monogamous marriage. I even said mono will probably remain the norm. Re-read my original claim on the future of marriage :P

No.... No they don't.... '-' I feel like you're basically saying, "me and my friends don't like older men. Therefore, no women like older men." Makes no sense. No.... No they don't.... '-' I suppose his cited examples would be Donald Trump, Silvio Berlusconi and Sir Bruce Forsyth. :rolleyes: Baring in mind how persistently gay people are fighting for the right to marry in a religious establishment, and how hard religious establishments themselves are fighting for the right to legally hold those marriages, I think you're being very presumptuous there. It is true that less people marry and apparently 50% of us in relationships are not marrying now, but the other way of reading is that is 50% are getting married, and some of the reasons those people are in wedlock are very personal and therefore not so susceptible to changes in the social norm. To say an institution like marriage, which has been part of human civilisation since Ancient Egypt, will be completely gone in a hundred years is an incredible claim. Unless it's a little nap in the afternoon because you're both tired after a day working/studying I've never been able to find much joy sleeping in the same bed with someone else. My arm gets trapped, it gets too hot, she steals all the duvet (etc.) so I'm not much help. Although it's a lovely moment to share with someone else, I'm still very protective about sleep. :P Go take another look at how rapidly society has changed within the past 50 years. How many people are getting divorced now (or not getting married in the first place) compared to the 1950s? How many people are atheists/nonreligious now compared to the 1950s?

You admitted in an earlier post that your polyamorous lifestyle is not suitable for raising children. IIRC, all I've said regarding children and poly is that it's something I haven't bothered to research yet since I'm not really interested; however from what little I've read, it's entirely feasible. Speaking of which, my old social psychology adviser sent me this when I was discussing polyamory with her: http://www.academia....s_relationships Summary: "Monogamy may not always be the best policy, according to a new review paper on the topic. Researchers explored the many long-believed benefits of monogamy, including sexual health and satisfaction, children's well-being, and relational adjustment and found no evidence to date to suggest the superiority of monogamy in those areas. They did, however, see a benefit for monogamy for avoiding stigma. Overall, they found that while monogamy may be an ideal choice for many individuals, consensual non-monogamy may be a viable alternative for those who choose it." I could say that you're suffering from the common misconception that it's impossible to live like I do now when I'm much older. But I know plenty of men who still maintain the same lifestyle. You underestimate how many young women fantasize about older men. Ever wonder why books like Fifty Shades of Gray are so popular? What makes you think I'm being delusional here? Just the fact that you've never seen it before? While polyamory might not become the "dominant lifestyle" anytime soon, I can almost guarantee that traditional monogamous marriage will be completely gone by the next century (in the Western world, at least).

Don't need to get married to have kids. Don't even need to be monogamous. Don't need to be young to date "high quality" women.

Keep in mind that the "lust" will pretty much disappear between the two over time, yet their lust for others will still remain the same. This is what causes problems unless both partners have low sex drives to begin with.

You're failing to look at the bigger picture :P Even if you find your "ideal" partner, that isn't necessarily enough. Regardless of how well you cover your bases, you're still rolling the dice with your life by choosing to get married.

That'd be funny if this thread gradually evolved into a "how to make weapons" FAQ. Actually that'd be terrifying

A few points: 1. Obviously I'm not 100% logical and obviously I don't make logical decisions 100% of the time. I'm only human. However, I DO make logical decisions far more than the average Joe, even if my emotions are making such decisions very difficult. This is why I'm consistently extremely happy. 2. By purchasing the expensive sports car, you waive your right to complain about any problems it brings which could've been avoided by purchasing the mid-sized car. 3. Intentionally making irrational decisions to grant you short-term gratification instead of long-term happiness is a habit that will cost you dearly down the road. If you insist on basing your major life decisions on such a thought process, you're playing with fire and essentially leaving your future to a dice roll in which the odds are NOT in your favor.

I'm not criticising his beliefs because they're different from mine. I'm criticising his beliefs because they're completely irrational.

You should take a break and carefully evaluate the logic/beliefs of that statement

Whatever makes you happy :P

For boring her/being monogamous with her. Women don't usually cheat when they're in the honeymoon phase.

Everyone's partially responsible-- the girl, her bf, and the guy she cheats with. Personally I don't see anything wrong with hooking up with a girl in a relationship. But I'm not going to go out of my way to pick up a girl with a boyfriend. And I'd never hook up with a girl if I personally knew her bf either.

Does it matter? :P

Tbh I think not banging/dating girls simply because you don't have feelings for them, or because they don't fit into your idea of the "ideal girl" is completely stupid and illogical. Bang/date girls first, and THEN decide if they're worth keeping around based on how they treat you and how they behave. That's really all that matters. You'll probably end up developing feelings for them as you spend more time with them too. Better to be infatuated once you're already dating than before you've even done anything romantic with her like every other guy.

Yes but these days they'd never know

My point is that your method's unhealthy lol